Winter 2012, Volume 11, Issue 1 - Association of Leadership

i

Journal

of

Leadership Education

...is an international, refereed journal that serves scholars and professional

practitioners engaged in leadership education.

...provides a forum for the development of the knowledge base and professional

practice of leadership education world wide.

...is made available through the continued support and efforts of the

membership of the Association of Leadership Educators.

Copyright 2012 by the Association of Leadership Educators.

All rights reserved.

ISSN 1552-9045

Journal of Leadership Education Volume 11, Issue 1 – Winter 2012

ii

Volume 11, Number 1 – Winter 2012

The Journal of Leadership Education (JOLE) is the official publication of the Association of Leadership Educators. The purpose of JOLE is to provide a forum for development of the knowledge base and practice of leadership education. The journal is intended to promote a dialogue that engages both academics and practitioners. Thus, JOLE has a particular interest in applied research and it is the premise of JOLE that feedback between theory and practice tests both and makes each better. The journal provides several categories for submittals to promote diversity of discussion from a variety of authors. The members and board of the Association of Leadership Educators became aware of the need for a journal about leadership education in the early 1990s. The challenge of educating people about leadership is particularly provocative, complex, and subtle. Other journals with leadership in the title focus primarily on defining and describing leadership, and journals concerning education seldom address the subject of leadership. Indeed, one common argument in society is that leadership is innate (you have it or you don’t) and teaching leadership is difficult and often ineffective. This attitude is expressed, perhaps, in the dearth of leadership courses on our university campuses. In this context, JOLE provides a means to test the hypothesis that leadership education is possible. Our journal sits at the nexus of education theory and practice and leadership theory and practice, and from this divide, this mountain pass there is a need to look “both ways.” Whether leadership education is a discipline of its own is unclear, at least at present. If nothing else, by looking both ways this journal hopes to provide a passageway between two disciplines, enriching both in the process. JOLE is an electronic journal open to all, both as writers and readers. The journal has been conceived as an “on-line” journal that is available on the world-wide web and is to be self-supporting. To this end, at some time in the future a fee may be charged for publication. At present, all editorial, Board, and reviewer services are provided without cost to JOLE or its members by volunteer scholars and practitioners.


iii

Editorial Staff

Editor • Barry Boyd, Texas A & M University

Associate Editor • Brent J. Goertzen, Fort Hays State University

Editorial Reviewers • Scott Allen, John Carroll University • Tony Andenoro, Gonzaga University • Jill Arensdorf, Fort Hays State University • Paul Arsenault, West Chester University • Elizabeth Bolton, University of Florida • Amy Boren, University of Nebraska-Lincoln • Chester Bowling, Ohio State University • Christie Brungardt, Fort Hays State University • Curt Brungardt, Fort Hays State University • Jackie Bruce, University of Pennsylvania • Robert Colvin, Christopher Newport University • Marilyn Corbin, Pennsylvania State University • Chris Crawford, Fort Hays State University • Ken Culp III, University of Kentucky • Renee Daugherty, Oklahoma State University • Dennis Duncan, University of Georgia • Don DiPaolo, University of Detroit • Garee Earnest, Ohio State University • Chanda Elbert, Texas A&M University • Janet Fox, Louisiana State University • Nancy Franz, University of Illinois • Susan Fritz, University of Nebraska, Lincoln • Greg Gifford, University of Florida • Mark Grandstaff, Brigham Young University • Kathy Guthrie, Florida State University • Paige Haber, University of San Diego • David Jones, North Carolina State University • Eric Kaufman, Virginia Tech University • Douglas Lindsay, United States Air Force Academy • Billy McKim, Texas A&M University • Tony Middlebrooks, University of Delaware • Jeffery P. Miller, Innovative Leadership Solutions • Lori Moore, Texas A&M University • Chris Morgan, University of Georgia


iv

• Martha Nall, University of Kentucky • Penny Pennington-Weeks, Oklahoma State University • Adrian Popa, Gonzaga University • Carolyn Roper, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign • John Ricketts, Tennessee State University • Kris Ricketts, University of Kentucky • David Rosch, University of Illinois • Manda Rosser, Texas A&M University • Mark Russell, Purdue University • Nicole Stedman, University of Florida • Carrie Stephens, University of Tennessee • Kelleen Stine-Cheyne, Texas A&M University • Wanda Sykes, North Carolina State University • Kurt Takamine, Brandman University • Laurie Thorp, Michigan State University • Jim Ulrich, Antioch University • Willis M. Watt, Methodist University • Bill Weeks, Oklahoma State University • Carol Wheeler, Our Lady of the Lake University • Andrew White, Boise State University • Jennifer Williams, Texas A&M University


v

Table of Contents

From the Editors’ Clipboard viii

Barry Boyd, Texas A & M University

Exploring Signature Pedagogies in Undergraduate Leadership

Education

Outstanding 2011 ALE Conference Paper

1

Daniel M. Jenkins, Ph.D., University of South Florida

The Durable Effects of Short-term Programs On Student Leadership

Development

28

David M. Rosch, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Arran Caza, Wake Forest University

Impact of Personal Growth Projects on Leadership Identity

Development

49

Summer F. Odom, Texas A&M University Barry L. Boyd, Texas A&M University Jennifer Williams, Texas A&M University

Insights From Six Women On Their Personal Journeys To Becoming

Deans of Agriculture: A Qualitative Study

64

Sarah Kleihauer, Wilson Central High School Carrie Ann Stephens, University of Tennessee, Knoxville William E. Hart, University of Tennessee, Knoxville

Adolescent Involvement in Extracurricular Activities: Influences on

Leadership Skills

84

Donna Hancock, University of Georgia Patricia Hyjer Dyk, University of Kentucky Kenneth Jones, University of Kentucky

What Managerial Leadership Behaviors do Student Managerial

Leaders Need? An Empirical Study of Student Organizational

Members

102

Tim O. Peterson, Ph.D., North Dakota State University Claudette M. Peterson, Ed.D., North Dakota State University


vi

What’s Context Got To Do With It? An Exploration of Leadership

Development Programs for the Agricultural Community

121

Eric K. Kaufman, Virginia Tech Richard J. Rateau, Virginia Tech Hannah S. Carter, University of Florida L. Rochelle Strickland, University of Georgia

First-Year Student Perceptions Related to Leadership Awareness and

Influences

140

Melissa R. Shehane, Texas A&M University Kathryn A. Sturtevant, Texas A&M University Lori L. Moore, Texas A&M University Kim E. Dooley, Texas A&M University

Professor as Facilitator: Shaping an Emerging, Living System of Shared

Leadership in the Classroom

157

David S. Bright, Ph.D., Wright State University Elizabeth Fisher Turesky, Ph.D., University of Southern Maine Roger Putzel, Ph.D., St. Michael’s College Thomas Stang, Wright State University

Emotionally Intelligent Leadership: An Integrative, Process-Oriented

Theory of Student Leadership

177

Scott J. Allen, Ph.D., John Carroll University Marcy Levy Shankman, Ph.D., MLS Consulting, LLC Rosanna F. Miguel, Ph.D., John Carroll University

Evaluating Innovative Leadership Preparation: How What You

Want Drives What (and How) You Evaluate

204

Frederick C. Buskey, Western Carolina University Meagan Karvonen, Western Carolina University

Summer Leadership Development Program for Chemical

Engineering Students

222

Annie E Simpson, University of Toronto Greg J Evans, University of Toronto Doug Reeve, University of Toronto


vii

Enhancing Leadership Skills in Volunteers 233

Landry L. Lockett, Ed. D., Texas A&M University Barry Boyd, Ph. D., Texas A&M University

Using the 5Ps Leadership Analysis to Examine The Battle of

Antietam: An Explanation and Case Study

245

Bradley Z. Hull, Ph.D., John Carroll University Scott J. Allen, Ph.D., John Carroll University

Personal, Professional Coaching: Transforming Professional

Development for Teacher and Administrative Leaders 263

Janet Patti, Ed.D., Hunter College Allison A. Holzer, M.A.T., Ruler Group Robin Stern, Ph.D. Teacher’s College Marc A. Brackett, Ph.D., Yale University

Submission Guidelines 275

Le Culminant 277


viii

From the Editor’s Clipboard

Volume 11, Number 1 – Winter 2012

Resolutions New Year’s resolutions – we all make them and we all break them. Some have given up on making resolutions because of the difficulty in keeping them. But I see the beginning of a new year, and a new semester, as an opportunity for renewal; the chance to make a change for the better. Therefore, I propose a few New Year’s resolutions for leadership educators. I resolve:

• First, to continue to grow as a leadership educator. New theories and model of leadership and instruction are emerging daily. If I do not model life-long learning, how can I expect my students to embrace the concept?

• Second, to try to get to know my students on a somewhat personal level. Teaching, like leadership, is about relationships. Students won’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.

• And finally, I resolve to engage my students on a deep level. I’m reminded of Plutach, “A mind is a fire to be kindled, not a vessel to be filled.”

Most leadership educators that I know are passionate people; passionate about most aspect of their lives, but especially passionate about leadership education. My resolutions may already be on your list, but if they aren’t, join me in renewing your commitment and your passion for students. Happy New Year.

Respectfully Submitted,

Barry L. Boyd, Editor

Issue Information

We are honored to print the Outstanding Research Paper from the 2011 ALE Conference in Denver. This is a first for JOLE and will become a regular feature of the Winter issue. In addition, fifty-four manuscripts were submitted for this issue, a record for JOLE. The acceptance rate for this issue is 26%. My thanks to the members of the Editing Board for their careful review of the submitted manuscripts and a special thanks to those who reviewed an extra manuscript to ensure that all manuscripts received a thorough review. Your efforts contribute to the advancement of the theory and practice of leadership education.


ix

Exploring Signature Pedagogies in Undergraduate Leadership Education

Outstanding 2011 ALE Conference Paper

Jenkins conducted a national survey to identify instructional strategies most used by leadership educators. This paper was selected as the Outstanding Research Paper at the 2011 Association of Leadership Educators’ Conference. Jenkins discovered that class discussion was the signature pedagogy used in undergraduate leadership education. Read further to discover the remaining strategies that made the top ten.

Research Features

The Durable Effects of Short-term Programs On Student Leadership

Development

Rosch and Caza examined the impact of short-term leadership programs on students using the Socially Responsible Leadership Scale. Their findings indicate that some leadership competencies can be enhanced through short-term programs while other competencies may require longer duration efforts.

Impact of Personal Growth Projects on Leadership Identity Development

Odom, Boyd, and Williams examined the impact that Personal Growth Projects (PGP) had on students in a personal leadership education course. Written reflections from the PGP assignments were analyzed through the lens of the Leadership Identity Development model (LID). The Personal Growth Project contributed to the development of students’ leadership identity, especially in the “developing-self” component of the LID model.

Insights From Six Women On Their Personal Journeys To Becoming Deans

of Agriculture: A Qualitative Study Reflection on one’s leadership journey is a powerful tool to understanding leadership development. Kleihauer, Stephens, and Hart examined the leadership journeys of six female deans of agriculture. What factors contributed to their success? While it may not surprise the readers that family support was important, other factors may surprise you. Read further to find out about these six fascinating women. Adolescent Involvement in Extracurricular Activities: Influences on

Leadership Skills

The roles that students’ have in extracurricular activities, as well as the support of family and other adults, has a significant impact on students’ perceptions of their leadership skills. Hancock, Dyk, and Jones’s used the Search Institute’s Profiles of Student Life: Attitudes and Behaviors instrument and the 4-H Essential Elements in their study of 647 high school students. They recommend that youth-


x

adult relationships exist as formal mentoring relationships to enhance students’ perceptions of their leadership skills.

What Managerial Leadership Behaviors do Student Managerial Leaders

Need? An Empirical Study of Student Organizational Members

Student leadership learning may not be occurring at the depth that most educators believe. Peterson and Peterson examined the critical managerial leadership behaviors that student leaders require to move their organizations forward. Among the eight critical behaviors identified in the study, building trust and credibility was seen as the most important by participants.

What’s Context Got To Do With It? An Exploration of Leadership

Development Programs for the Agricultural Community What’s Context Got to Do With It is not a hit song by Tina Turner, but a hit manuscript by Kaufman, Rateau, Carter, and Strickland. The authors examine the components for an emerging leadership program for the agricultural sector from the viewpoint of stakeholders. Existing leadership programs set in the context of agriculture are used as the lens for this research.

First-Year Student Perceptions Related to Leadership Awareness and

Influence When do students first become aware of being involved in leadership and what do they believe influenced their leadership? These are important questions that can guide educators in designing effective leadership development programs. Shehane, Sturtevant, Moore, and Dooley identified two themes related to leadership awareness, pre-college and positional versus non-positional roles, and four themes related to perceived leadership influences: external role models, internal beliefs, previous experience, and types of leadership/leadership philosophy.

Professor as facilitator: Shaping an Emerging, Living System of Shared

Leadership in the Classroom

Most leadership educators describe themselves as facilitators of learning as opposed to teachers or instructors, but this rarely happens in reality. Bright, Turesky, Putzel, and Stang describe a case where the instructors allowed the classroom culture to emerge, allowing the students to practice leadership in developing the classroom structure and culture.

Theory Features

Emotionally Intelligent Leadership: An Integrative, Process-Oriented

Theory of Student Leadership


xi

Allen, Shankman, and Miguel outline a theory of Emotionally Intelligent Leadership (EIL) that combines the relevant models and theories in leadership with that of emotional intelligence. They describe 21 capacities that equip individuals with the knowledge, skills, abilities and other characteristics to achieve desired results. Evaluating Innovative Leadership Preparation: How What You Want

Drives What (and How) You Evaluate Leadership programs are challenged to produce evidence of their impact while also evaluating for formative purposes. Buskey and Karvonen outline a collaborative process for evaluating a leadership program that uses multiple sources of data, yet is not burdensome to faculty or participants.

Application Briefs and Cases

A Summer Leadership Development Program for Chemical Engineering

Students

Leadership occurs across many contexts. Simpson, Evans, and Reeve describe a leadership development program for chemical engineering students. Components of the program include Self, Relational, Organizational, and Societal Leadership components. Their program encompasses curricular, co-curricular, and extra-curricular activities to engage the students.

Enhancing Leadership Skills in Volunteers Lockett and Boyd offer specific methods that administrators of volunteers can use to specifically foster the leadership development of volunteers. While the authors use the context of Cooperative Extension programs, their suggestions have implications for all contexts in which volunteers operate.

Using the 5Ps Leadership Analysis to Examine The Battle of Antietam: An

Explanation and Case Study

Hull and Allen examine the leadership of generals Robert E. Lee and George B. McClellan during the battle of Antietam in 1862. The 5Ps Leadership Analysis is used as the tool to analyze their leadership effectiveness and to draw implications for leadership in today’s organizations. The authors describe how this case can be used effectively in the classroom to critically analyze leadership and transfer that knowledge to modern contexts. Personal, Professional Coaching: Transforming Professional Development

for Teacher and Administrative Leaders Patti, Holzer, Stern, and Bracket describe a coaching strategy that they successfully use in leadership training and development for teacher and administrative leaders. Their strategy encompasses reflective practices that


xii

cultivate self-awareness, emotion management, social awareness, and relationship management.


1

Exploring Signature Pedagogies in Undergraduate

Leadership Education

Daniel M. Jenkins, Ph.D.

Adjunct Professor of Leadership Studies College of Undergraduate Studies

Center for Leadership and Civic Engagement University of South Florida

Tampa, FL [email protected]

Abstract

This research explores the instructional strategies most frequently used by leadership educators who teach academic credit-bearing undergraduate leadership studies courses through a national survey and identifies signature pedagogies within the leadership discipline. Findings from this study suggest that class discussion—whether in the form of true class discussion or a hybrid of interactive lecture and discussion—is the signature pedagogy for undergraduate leadership education. While group and individual projects and presentations, self-assessments and instruments, and reflective journaling were also used frequently, overall, discussion-based pedagogies were used most frequently. These findings offer attributes that a variety of leadership educators have shared as effective for teaching and learning within the discipline and may facilitate the development of new leadership programming policies, provide direction for future research, and contribute to the existing body of literature.

Introduction

Since 1990 only a few studies have explored the instructional strategies utilized in student leadership development programming (e.g., Allen & Hartman, 2009; Avolio, 1999; Bass, 1990; Conger, 1992; Day, 2000; Eich, 2008; London, 2002; Yukl, 2006). While these studies have addressed various stakeholders’ perceptions of leadership development programming (and student perceptions in depth), only a handful collected data from leadership practitioners not identified specifically as university instructors. For example, in a grounded theory study of high quality leadership programs, Eich (2008) interviewed 62 stakeholders in leadership programs that ranged in type from an academic course, to a week retreat, to a co-curricular program, to a service leadership program. Yet, only 17


2

of the stakeholders were practitioners (i.e., instructors). Similarly, Allen and Hartman (2009) surveyed undergraduate business students and attendees of a student leadership conference. And while their research provided insight as to student preferences and experiences in leadership development programming, we know little about the experiences of those who deliver said programming or the instructional strategies they employ. In fact, relatively few studies have focused on the teaching methods, instructional approaches, or leadership studies curriculum design and content while a greater number have focused on leadership studies programs (e.g., Allen & Hartman, 2009; Eich, 2008; Komives, Dugan, Owen, Slack, & Wagner, 2006; Ritch & Mengel, 2009; Roberts, 2007). Yet, according to the International Leadership Association Directory of Leadership Programs more than 1,500 leadership studies programs exist today! Despite the interest in student leadership development programming, the sparse few studies that have investigated instructors who teach academic credit-bearing courses have been limited to an insufficient number of participants. In fact, almost no research exists in regard to leadership educators. To address this overlooked question, this study specifically targeted instructors that teach academic credit-bearing courses through a national survey.

Purpose and Significance of the Study

The purpose of this study is to identify the instructional strategies that are most frequently used by instructors when they teach courses in the leadership discipline and identify potential signature pedagogies. Despite the increased interest in leadership education, the literature has only sparsely reviewed specific leadership pedagogies as a group. To explore this inquiry, a quantitative survey of most commonly utilized instructional strategies designed chiefly around the learning sources leader development as offered by Allen and Hartman (2009) was used. Allen and Hartman (2008a, 2009b, & 2009) created one of the first comprehensive lists of leadership development teaching methods found in the literature (see also Avolio, 1999; Day, 2000; London, 2002; Yukl, 2006). This list was embedded in the framework offered by Conger (1992) from his experiences in leadership training programs outside of academia. In the 1992 work Learning

to Lead, Jay A. Conger explored five innovative leadership training programs outside universities and joined them as a participant and observer (p. xiii). Following his documented experiences in these, Conger and his research team reported no “one best” program for leadership training. Instead, they found that instructional methods each had distinct strengths and drawbacks and the researchers categorized leadership training into four key approaches: (a) personal growth, (b) conceptual, (c) feedback, and (d) skill-building (p. 155). Several years


3

later in 2008 and 2009, Allen and Hartman built upon Conger’s work and published three articles in peer-reviewed journals that identified 40 commonly used learning sources (2008a, 2009b, & 2009). Yet, through their research on students in leadership studies courses, no distinguishable leadership pedagogy emerged. Instead, they had a collection of sorts, identifying 40 sources of learning commonly used in leadership development programming for collegians. This study builds upon the work of Conger (1992) and Allen and Hartman (2008a, 2008b, & 2009). Through a national survey investigating instructional strategy use in undergraduate leadership education this study aimed to address these gaps in the literature and identify distinguishable or signature pedagogies within the discipline.

Research Questions

1. What are the most frequently employed instructional strategies used by instructors teaching undergraduate leadership studies courses?

2. Are there identifiable signature pedagogies in the leadership discipline?

Literature Review

With the current state and growth of leadership studies, the need for research exploring the various strategies for teaching and learning in the discipline has never been greater. While there are several bodies of relevant literature that informed this study such as research on college teaching and learning and different types of instructional strategies, studies investigating the profile of instructional strategies used across the disciplines are still very limited. Further, the quality or use of specific instructional strategies in leadership education such as reflection (Burbach, Matkin, & Fritz, 2004; Densten & Gray, 2001), service learning (Scharff, 2009; Seemiller, 2006), teambuilding (Moorhead & Griffin, 2009), research leadership (Jones & Kilburn, 2005), critical thinking (Gifford, 2010; Jenkins & Cutchens, 2011), feedback (Day, 2000), self-assessments (Buschlen, 2009), role-play (Sogurno, 2003), simulation (Allen, 2008), exams (Moore, 2010) and the case-in-point approach (Parks, 2005) have been reviewed only in small quantities. Equally, the literature is sparse of exploration into the preferences of leadership educators. Furthermore, the literature offers just a hodgepodge of research on various teaching and assessment strategies in leadership education. And while the literature surveying instructional strategies in leadership education is growing, it remains underdeveloped. Likewise, a gap in the literature related to best practices within the discipline also remains. In order to provide relevant leadership education, it is important to carefully assess stakeholders responsible for delivering knowledge within the discipline. In the


4

same way, gaining an understanding of leadership educators’ preferences at the most basic level is the critical first step to further inquiry within the discipline. Allen and Hartman’s (2008a, 2008b, 2009) conceptualization of Conger’s (1992) framework of sources of learning in leadership development was used as the conceptual framework giving meaning and direction to the instructional strategy inquiry in this study. The present study focused on 24 instructional strategies including 12 of Allen and Hartman's (2009) 20 focused sources of learning used in a variety of leadership development programs as well as three of an additional 20 Allen and Hartman tagged as more appropriate for an organizational context. The remaining nine strategies and final selection for inclusion in this study (see Table 1) were based on a combination of recommendations from a panel of experts, a review of the literature, and the researcher’s expertise and experience. Admittedly, all instructional methods have their pros and cons. Indeed, because learning leadership and developing leadership skills may be different than learning other content in a traditional classroom setting, leadership education may need different strategies for facilitating learning (Eich, 2008; Komives, Lucas, & McMahon, 2007; Wren, 1995). Accordingly, leadership education requires its own examination to determine how effective teaching and learning of leadership is done.


5

Table 1

Instructional Strategies

No. Instructional Strategy Description

1. *Case Studies Students examine written or oral stories or vignettes that highlight a case of effective or ineffective leadership.

2. Class Discussion Instructor facilitates sustained conversation and/or question and answer segment with the entire class.

3. Exams Students complete tests or exams that last the majority of the class period intended to assess subject matter mastery.

4. *Games Students engage in interactions in a prescribed setting and are constrained by a set of rules and procedures. (e.g., Jeopardy, Who Wants to be a Millionaire, Family Feud, etc.)

5. **Group Projects/Presentations

Students work on a prescribed project or presentation in a small group.

6. **Guest Speaker Students listen to a guest speaker/lecturer discuss their personal leadership experiences.

7. *Icebreakers Students engage in a series of relationship-building activities to get to know one another.

8. In-Class Short Writing Students complete ungraded writing activities designed to enhance learning of course content.

9. *Individual Leadership Development Plans

Students develop specific goals and vision statements for individual leadership development.

10. Interactive Lecture/Discussion

Instructor presents information in 10-20 minute time blocks with period of structured interaction/discussion in-between mini-lectures.

11. Interview of a Leader Students observe or interview an individual leading others effectively or ineffectively and report their findings to the instructor/class.

12. *Lecture Students listen to instructor presentations lasting most of the class session.

13. Media Clips Students learn about leadership theory/topics through film, television, or other media clips (e.g., YouTube, Hulu).

14. Quizzes Students complete short graded quizzes intended to assess subject matter mastery.

15. *Reflective Journals Students develop written reflections on their


6

No. Instructional Strategy Description

experiences.

16. *Research Project/Presentation

Students actively research a leadership theory or topic and present findings in oral or written format.

17. *Role Play Activities Students engage in an activity where they act out a set of defined role behaviors or positions with a view to acquire desired experiences.

18. *Self-Assessments & Instruments

Students complete questionnaires or other instruments designed to enhance their self-awareness in a variety of areas (e.g., learning style, personality type, leadership style, etc.).

19. *Service Learning Students participate in a service learning or philanthropic project.

20. *Simulation Students engage in an activity that simulates complex problems or issues and requires decision-making.

21. *Small Group Discussions Students take part in small group discussions on the topic of leadership or some aspect of group dynamics.

22. *Story or Storytelling Students listen to a story highlighting some aspect of leadership; often given by an individual with a novel experience.

23. Student Peer Teaching Students, in pairs or groups, teach designated course content or skills to fellow students.

24. **Teambuilding Students engage in group activities that emphasize working together in a spirit of cooperation (e.g., setting team goals/priorities, delegating work, examining group relationships/dynamics, etc.).

*Denotes one of Allen and Hartman’s (2009) 20 focused “sources of learning.” **Denotes one of (or an adaption of one of) Allen and Hartman’s (2009) “other sources of learning.”

Further, this study was informed by Lee S. Shulman’s (2005) framework of signature pedagogies. These frameworks place the research within its intended context of collegiate teaching and learning within the leadership discipline, which begins with the exploration of the target population in order to identify and explore their teaching preferences. According to Shulman (2005), signature pedagogies are the forms of instruction that leap to mind when we first think about the preparation of members of particular professions. They implicitly define what counts as knowledge in a field and how things become known. They define how knowledge is analyzed, criticized, accepted, or discarded as well as inform students to think, to perform, and to act with integrity. To date, literature does not


7

exist which discusses signature pedagogies in the leadership discipline. Yet, scholars have applied Shulman’s model to other disciplines. Perhaps it is because the study of leadership transcends the academic disciplines and professions (Northouse, 2010; Rost & Barker, 2000; Yukl, 2006). Since 2005 a number of published books have examined educating specific professions such as clergy (Foster, Dahill, Golemon, & Tolentino, 2005), lawyers (Sullivan, Colby, Wegner, & Bond, 2007), nurses (Benner, Sutphen, Leonard, & Day, 2009), engineers (Sheppard, Macatangay, & Colby, 2009), and physicians (Cooke, Irby, O’Brien, & Shulman, 2010). Most recently, Exploring Signature Pedagogies: Approaches

to Teaching Disciplinary Habits of Mind (Gurung, Chick, & Haynie, 2009) provide a collection of discussions describing commonly employed pedagogies in the disciplines of humanities (history and literary studies), fine arts (creative writing and arts), social sciences (geography, human development, and psychology), natural sciences (agriculture and biological sciences), and mathematics (computer science, mathematics, and physics). Shulman (2005) explains that effective signature pedagogies are those that incorporate active student participation, make students feel deeply engaged, promote a learning environment where students feel visible (making it hard for students to disappear and become anonymous). Furthermore, signature pedagogies tend to be interactive, meaning students are not only accountable to their teacher, but also to fellow students. Ultimately, signature pedagogies breed accountability of performance and interaction, as well as simply removing the cloak of invisibility leading to a much higher affective level in class. In fact, the pedagogical attributes that enhance student learning and leadership development are at the center of determining excellence in leadership education (Eich, 2008). Arguably, since leadership development workshops, classic teambuilding seminars, and other interactive activities represent the earliest forms of leadership education, leadership educators have consistently demonstrated these types of techniques. Is there then, a signature pedagogy in leadership education? Are leadership studies educators/programs preparing members of particular professions? Many scholars argue that leadership studies transcend the disciplines and prepare students for all professions (e.g., Doh, 2003; Wren, Riggio, & Genovese, 2009; Zimmerman-Oster & Burkhardt, 1999). Thus, the challenge of identifying signature pedagogies in leadership is an important one.

Methods

The 303 instructor participants that teach academic credit-bearing undergraduate leadership studies courses is the largest reported study of this population in any area. Participants self-reported having taught an in-class/face-to-face (not online) academic credit-bearing undergraduate leadership course in the United States


8

within the previous two years. This initial question determined the eligibility of participants and to use said course as a reference point while they completed the survey. The analyzed data was collected from a web-based questionnaire through a national study that targeted thousands of leadership studies instructors through two primary sources from October 25, 2010 through December 1, 2010. The first source was the organizational memberships and databases of the following professional associations/organizations or their respective member interest groups: the International Leadership Association (ILA), NASPA (Student Affairs Professionals in Higher Education) Student Leadership Programs group, and the National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs (NCLP). The second source was a random sample of instructors drawn from the ILA Directory of Leadership Programs, a searchable directory of leadership programs available to all ILA members. While the first source was more of a shotgun approach—these organizations were most likely to have ideal participants as members—return rates for the 303 analyzed surveys for the ILA (7.84%), NCLP (10.04%), and NASPA (0.93%) were less than desirable. Conversely, the second and more directly targeted source from the ILA directory provided a 52.49% return rate. These data collection procedures provided the researcher with the best possible sources to generalize the population.

The majority of participants were white (83.8%) and female (54.8%). Also, 58.4% had doctorates, 38.6% had master’s degrees, and 60.2% reported having more than five years of teaching experience. Perhaps surprisingly, only 7.9% of the participants earned their advanced degree in leadership or leadership studies. Instead, degrees in organizational studies (13.9%), higher education (12.9%), college student affairs, development, or personnel (12.2%), and miscellaneous education-related degrees (11.6%) were more prominent. Participants’ primary activity at their institutions was teaching (46.2%), student affairs (23.4%), or administration (19.5%). Additionally, 95% of participants taught at a four-year public or private university or college. At these institutions, the academic college delivering the undergraduate leadership courses taught by the participants was usually Business (13.9%), Arts and Sciences (12.2%), or Education (11.6%). The specific academic department offering these courses was Leadership (19.1%), Business, Management, or Organizational Studies (16.2%), or Student Affairs (14.9%). More than half of all participants reported having personally experienced undergraduate leadership experiences while in college (50.2%) and 74.3% reported taking graduate coursework in leadership.

Type of Research Data

The analyzed data was collected from a web-based questionnaire through a national study. The questionnaire format of the web-based survey in this study implemented as many principles from Evans and Mathur (2005) and Dillman,


9

Tortora, and Barker (1999) as possible. The questionnaire was modeled after the approach used by Djajalaksana (2011) to collect data identify the most frequently used instructional strategies for teaching Information Systems (IS) courses and identify possible signature pedagogies found within the IS discipline. In this study, the survey instrument was used to collect demographic information to profile the participants and identify the most frequently used instructional strategies for teaching leadership courses, to identify possible signature pedagogies in the leadership discipline, and asses the learning goals instructors teaching these courses emphasize most. Based on Shulman’s (2005) description, signature pedagogies are those teaching methods that first come to a faculty member’s mind when he or she is asked to identify the most dominant instructional strategies used to teach a specific discipline. The 24 instructional strategies included in the survey were derived chiefly from Allen and Hartman’s Sources of Learning in Collegiate Leadership Development Programs (2009), reviewed by a panel of experts and tested in a pilot study.

Data Analysis Techniques

Answering Research Question One involved creating a frequency tabulation and percentage of responses for the items on the survey that looked at instructional strategy use. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the mean and confidence intervals of the item responses indicating frequency of instructional strategies use. Answering Research Question Two involved an explanatory factor analysis—specifically principal axis factoring (common factor analysis)—in order to identify the patterns of instructional strategies most often used in the leadership discipline. Cronbach’s alpha was used to assess reliability. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the composite scores of each subgroup.

Findings

Instructional Strategy Use in Undergraduate Leadership Education

Answering research questions one involved creating a frequency tabulation and calculating the percentage of responses for the items on the survey that looked at instructional strategy use. Participants reported frequency of use of each strategy using the following rating scale:

• 0 - Never (0% of my class sessions).

• 1 - Rarely (Less than 10% of my class sessions).

• 2 - Occasionally (11-33% of my class sessions).


10

• 3 - Frequently (34-65% of my class sessions).

• 4 - Almost Always (66-90% of my class sessions).

• 5 - Always (91-100% of my class sessions). Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the mean and confidence intervals of the item responses indicating frequency of instructional strategies used. Table 2 contains the means, standard deviations, and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of instructional strategies used. In Table 3 the original five-point rating scale was condensed into three categories (0-33% of class sessions, 34-65% of class sessions, and 66-100% of class sessions) to sharpen the visual representation of the results. A subsequent survey question asked participants to identify the three instructional strategies they used most frequently in their course. This question included the same 24 instructional strategies from the previous questions, but also included an “other” field in which participants could add an additional instructional method. Three participants noted using Ronald Heifetz’s famed strategy, “Case-in-point” (Heifetz, 1994) while no “other” instructional strategy appeared more than once. Table 4 illustrates the instructional strategies participants reported in their Top 3.


11

Table 2 Mean Frequency of Use of Instructional Strategies with Confidence Intervals and

Standard Deviations (N = 303)

95% CI

Instructional Method M (SD) LL UL

Class Discussion 4.48 (0.79) 4.39 4.56

Interactive Lecture & Discussion 3.84 (1.15) 3.71 3.97

Small Group Discussion 3.49 (1.19) 3.35 3.62

Group Projects & Presentations 3.31 (1.29) 3.17 3.46

Research Project Presentations 3.00 (1.61) 2.82 3.19

Reflective Journals 2.80 (1.61) 2.62 2.98

Self-Assessments/Instruments 2.80 (1.38) 2.64 2.95

Media Clips 2.62 (1.31) 2.48 2.77

Team Building 2.61 (1.47) 2.45 2.78

Case Studies 2.42 (1.18) 2.29 2.56

Individual Leader Development Plans 2.32 (1.63) 2.14 2.50

Lecture 2.28 (1.46) 2.12 2.45

Ice Breakers 2.21 (1.46) 2.05 2.38

Guest Speakers 2.03 (1.26) 1.89 2.18

Games 1.96 (1.28) 1.81 2.10

In-class Short Writing 1.93 (1.48) 1.77 2.10

Service Learning 1.91 (1.66) 1.72 2.10

Interview of a Leader 1.91 (1.47) 1.75 2.08

Peer Teaching 1.87 (1.52) 1.70 2.04

Stories 1.84 (1.51) 1.67 2.01

Exams 1.76 (1.61) 1.58 1.94

Role Play 1.71 (1.30) 1.56 1.86

Simulation 1.69 (1.37) 1.53 1.84

Quizzes 1.42 (1.44) 1.26 1.58


12

Table 3 Percentage of Instructors’ Instructional Strategies Use in Class Sessions

Instructional Method

0-33% of class sessions



Class Discussion 2.0% 6.9% 91.1%

Interactive Lecture/Discussion 11.6% 21.8% 66.7%

Small Group Discussions 18.5% 29.7% 51.8%

Group Projects/Presentations 25.7% 30.7% 43.6%

Research Project/Presentation 38.3% 19.1% 42.6%

Reflective Journals 46.5% 15.8% 37.6%

Teambuilding 50.5% 19.5% 30.0%

Self-Assessments & Instruments 42.6% 29.0% 28.4%

Individual Leadership Development Plans 56.8% 16.5% 26.7%

Media Clips 47.9% 28.7% 23.4%

Lecture 60.7% 17.5% 21.8%

Icebreakers 65.7% 13.9% 20.5%

Service Learning 66.0% 14.2% 19.8%

Case Studies 61.4% 21.5% 17.2%

In-Class Short Writing 70.0% 12.9% 17.2%

Exams 76.9% 6.3% 16.8%

Story or Storytelling 71.9% 11.2% 16.8%

Interview of a Leader 70.6% 13.5% 15.8%

Student Peer Teaching 70.0% 14.5% 15.5%

Guest Speaker 71.3% 14.5% 14.2%

Simulation 76.6% 10.2% 13.2%

Games 70.6% 16.5% 12.9%

Quizzes 80.2% 8.6% 11.2%

Role Play Activities 79.9% 9.9% 10.2%


13

Table 4 Instructor’s “Top 3” Most Used Instructional Strategies

Method n % of Sample

Class Discussion 165 54.5

Interactive Lecture & Discussion 143 47.2

Group Projects & Presentations 87 28.7

Self-Assessments & Instruments 72 23.8

Small Group Discussion 72 23.8

Reflective Journals 64 21.1

Case Studies 34 11.2

Service Learning 34 11.2

Research Projects & Presentations 33 10.9

Media Clips 26 8.6

Individual Leadership Development Plans 20 6.6

Lecture 20 6.6

Teambuilding 20 6.6

Guest Speakers 18 5.9

Peer Teaching 14 4.6

Exams 13 4.3

Simulation 12 4.0

Other 10 3.4

Leader Interviews 10 3.3

Games 9 3.0

Stories or Storytelling 9 3.0

Quizzes 8 2.6

Role Play 8 2.6

Ice Breakers 4 1.3

In-Class Short Writing 4 1.3

Overall, instructors teaching undergraduate leadership studies courses use varying forms of Class Discussion more so than any other instructional strategy. Specifically, Class Discussion, Interactive Lecture/Discussion and Small Group Discussion had the highest means scores and were used more frequently in 66-


14

100% of class sessions than all other instructional strategies surveyed. Conversely, these instructors use skill-building instructional strategies such as Simulation, Games, and Role Play Activities far less. Specifically, two out of three instructors surveyed used Class Discussion or Interactive Lecture/Discussion in 66-100% of their class sessions and 88.5% use them at least one third of the time. Further, 54.5% of instructors listed Class Discussion and 47.2% listed Interactive Lecture/Discussion in their Top 3 most used instructional strategies. At the same time, only 10.2% of instructors use Role Play Activities, Games, or Simulation 66-100% of the time with only 20.1% using them at least 34% of the time. Also of note, only 11.2% of instructors use Quizzes or Exams 66-100% of the time with only 19.8% using them at least 34% of the time. Likewise, only 4.3%, 3.0%, and 2.6% of instructors, respectively, listed Simulation, Games, and Role Play Activities in their Top 3 (see Table 4). Additionally, only 4.3% of instructors listed Exams in their Top 3 and only 2.6% listed Quizzes. To answer research question two, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was applied to explore which of the 24 instructional strategies from the questionnaire related most closely to one another (see Table 5). Then, the groups or “factors” from this statistical procedure were analyzed to see which groups emerged as those used most frequently. It was anticipated in the current study that the instructional strategies would group together similarly to the Four Approach models of leadership development posited by Conger (1992) and Allen and Hartman (2009). The four approaches in these models were: (a) Personal Growth, (b) Conceptual Understanding, (c) Feedback, and (d) Skill Building. While Personal Growth and Skill Building were retained, Conceptual Understanding was split into three separate dimensions: Research/Observation Conceptual

Understanding, Interactive Conceptual Understanding, and Conceptual

Understanding & Feedback. Accordingly, the third dimension of Conceptual Understanding from this study, Conceptual Understanding & Feedback, included instructional strategies found in both the Feedback and Conceptual Understanding approaches of the original models.


15

Table 5 Factor Loadings for Promax Oblique Seven-Factor Solution for the Items of the

Web-Based Questionnaire

Item Factor Loading

Factor 1: Skill Building

17. Role Play Activities. .88

20. Simulation. .56

4. Games. .54

Factor 2: Personal Growth

15. Reflective Journals. .61

19. Service Learning. .49

7. Icebreakers. .41

9. Individual Leadership Development Plans. .39

8. In-Class Short Writing. .37

Factor 3: Conceptual Understanding & Feedback

11. Interview of a Leader. .59

12. Lecture. .54

22. Story or Storytelling. .47

9. Individual Leadership Development Plans. .45

13. Media Clips. .42

16. Research Project/Presentation. .37

18. Self-Assessments & Instruments. .35

Factor 4: Traditional Assessment

3. Exams. .73

14. Quizzes. .72

Factor 5: Research/Observation Conceptual Understanding

5. Group Projects/Presentations. .59

16. Research Project/Presentation. .51

6. Guest Speaker. .44

Factor 6: Interactive Conceptual Understanding

21. Small Group Discussions. .77

23. Student Peer Teaching. .42

24. Teambuilding. .33

Factor 7: Class Discussion


16

Item Factor Loading

2. Class Discussion. .70

10. Interactive Lecture/Discussion. .50

*Note: N = 303 and α = .88

Labeling and Analysis of the Factors

Of greatest interest to the researcher was the emergence of two new approaches not included in the original models posited by Conger (1992) and Allen and Hartman (2009). These dimensions were Factor 7: Class Discussion and Factor 4: Traditional Assessment. While Traditional Assessment (exams and quizzes) proved to be the least frequently used group of instructional strategies, Class

Discussion was used more often than any other group. The Class Discussion group includes traditional class discussion where the instructor facilitates sustained conversation and/or question and answer segment with the entire class as well as interactive lecture/discussion where the instructor presents information in 10-20 minute time blocks with period of structured interaction/discussion in-between mini-lectures. The instructional strategies contained in Factor 1: Skill Building (role play activities, simulation, and games) all fell within Allen and Hartman’s (2009) categorization of “Skill Building.” These instructional strategies all emphasize active, experiential, classroom-based pedagogies that promote students doing and engaging in learning. Use of these pedagogies is often considered medium- to high-risk (the risks that students will not participate, use higher-order thinking, or learn sufficient content, that faculty members will feel a loss of control, lack necessary skills, or be criticized for teaching in unorthodox way) by college instructors (Bonwell & Eison, 1991). While the instructional strategies contained in Factor 2: Personal Growth (reflective journals, service learning, icebreakers, individual leadership development plans, and in-class short writing) all fell within Allen and Hartman’s (2009) categorization of “Personal Growth,” with the exception of icebreakers and in-class short writing (which was not one of the sources of learning contained in their model). In their model, informal networking appeared in this category and arguably, icebreakers are as much about breaking the ice as they are about networking in an informal environment. Further, in-class short writing is clearly an individual activity designed to stimulate the learner to think, write, and reflect. This group of instructional strategies emphasizes personal growth through some type of reflection, service, or articulating through writing a personal vision statement. The instructional strategies contained in Factors 3 (Conceptual Understanding &

Feedback), 5 (Research/Observation Conceptual Understanding), and 6


17

(Interactive Conceptual Understanding) were all closely related to Allen and Hartman’s (2009) categorization of “Conceptual Understanding.” Following Class Discussion, these three categories were used most frequently. In leadership education, conceptual understanding focuses on improving the learner’s knowledge through exposure to the topic of leadership and is much more observer-oriented (Conger, 1992); while other instructional strategies involve more individual activity and inclusion (Allen & Hartman, 2009). The differentiation between these three factors emerged from the approaches of the instructional strategies therein. First, Factor 3 included the following instructional strategies: interview of a leader, lecture, story or storytelling, individual leadership development plans, media clips, research project/presentation, and self-assessments & instruments. This group focused on the understanding of leadership concepts through a variety of instructional strategies designed to invoke and connect with the pragmatic and also provide useful feedback. Yet, while lecture, stories, interviewing leaders, individual leadership development or vision plans, and media clips are only briefly mentioned in the literature, there is an extensive literature base on the use of assessments and instruments in leadership education. Second, Factor 5 included the instructional strategies group project/presentation, research project/presentation, and guest speaker. These instructional strategies emphasize students presenting leadership research and/or observing peers or guest speakers. Third, Factor 6 include the instructional strategies small group discussions, student peer teaching, and teambuilding. In this study, the term “interactive” was used to describe the active, group-oriented, and relational aspects of these concept-focused instructional strategies.

The analysis of the composite scores based on the mean of the items in each group resulted in findings similar to those from the initial frequency tabulations. Specifically, Class Discussion was group of instructional strategies instructors reporting using most (M=4.16/5.00), while Skill Building (M=1.79) and Traditional Assessment (M=1.59) were the strategies instructors reported using least. The composite (mean) scores of Research/Observation Conceptual

Understanding (M=2.78), Interactive Conceptual Understanding (M=2.40), and Conceptual Understanding & Feedback (M=2.24) were separated by only 0.38. Personal Growth (M=2.24) was used slightly less than the three Conceptual Understanding groups and more so than Skill Building and Traditional

Assessment.

Signature Pedagogies in Undergraduate Leadership Education

Until now, no one has investigated signature pedagogies in leadership education. According to Shulman (2005), signature pedagogies are the forms of instruction that leap to mind when we first think about the preparation of members of particular professions. They implicitly define what counts as knowledge in a field,


18

how things become known, and how knowledge is analyzed, criticized, accepted, or discarded. One of the unique characteristics of leadership studies is that it transcends the disciplines and prepares students for all professions (Doh, 2003; Wren, Riggio, & Genovese, 2009; Zimmerman-Oster & Burkhardt, 1999). This question prompted the researcher in this study to ask: “What are the signature pedagogies used to prepare the future leaders of our organizations?”

The findings of this study suggest that class discussion whether in the form of true class discussion or interactive lecture and discussion are used most frequently. Perhaps, class discussion or “discussion pedagogy” is the signature pedagogy for undergraduate leadership education. Yet, the results of this study also indicate that instructional strategies that include group and individual projects and presentations as well as self-assessments and instruments, small group discussion, and reflective journaling are also used far more frequently than most others. Thus, the signature pedagogies in undergraduate leadership education might be a collection of class discussion, projects and presentations, self-assessments and instruments, and critical reflection.

Implications for Practice

This study was undertaken with the vision that it could be pragmatically used by leadership educators and student affairs professionals. This exploratory study of instructional strategies and learning goals within the leadership discipline has numerous implications for practice for a variety of individuals who seek to advance teaching and learning leadership. As well, the findings of this study have implications for leadership studies and pedagogy. These findings can provide a foundation to develop workshops for leadership educators or enhance existing ones. Findings from this study may also catalyze ideas for innovations to the way leadership is taught or promote focused research on the use and best practices of the most frequently used instructional strategies.

Instructional Strategy Use

There ought to be workshops on best practices in leadership education. For example, while simulation, games and role play are used quite infrequently by the instructors surveyed in this study, perhaps they value it but do not know how to use it effectively. Workshops that emphasize best practices including the design of these activities, what high quality work looks like, and how to assess their effectiveness could prove extremely beneficial in the discipline.

Equally, if discussion-based pedagogies are the most frequently employed instructional strategy used by instructors teaching academic credit-bearing


19

undergraduate leadership studies courses, it is imperative that this strategy is utilized effectively. Yet, a review of the literature uncovered very few resources that help faculty effectively facilitate class discussion. Experts agree that leading a producing discussion is among the most challenging and demanding tasks of an instructor—and one of the most satisfying when things go well (Cross, 2002). According to Davis (1993):

A good give-and-take discussion can produce unmatched learning experiences as students articulate their ideas, respond to their classmates’ points, and develop skills in evaluating the evidence for their own and others’ positions. Initiating and sustaining a lively productive discussion are among the most challenging of activities for an instructor. (p. 63)

Cross (2002) stresses that participation is a necessary but hardly sufficient condition for learning. Further, like leadership, leading productive discussion takes planning. Cross used a basketball metaphor to explain that just as a basketball coach goes into the game with a strategy, one flexible enough to change if conditions demand it but firm enough to reach the goal, a teacher must do likewise and have their eye on the objective. This is related to the leadership practice and application in meetings posited by Eich (2008). Meaningful discussions and episodes of difference might very well occur during class discussion; the most frequently reported instructional strategy from this study. However, what we do not know is whether leadership programs or their instructors are doing these things effectively. How will student affairs professionals such as leadership program directors or leadership studies faculty know they are being effective?

Resonating with the well-known research of Kouzes and Posner’s (2007) Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership, leaders must inspire a shared vision. Likewise, instructors teaching leadership to undergraduates must have a vision for the class discussion. Where will it go? What, specifically, do they want students to learn from each class meeting? Undergraduates in leadership studies courses aptly enjoy these courses. In fact, the unique pedagogical practices in undergraduate leadership courses are a magnet for many. Yet, instructors must—must—be purposeful in their pedagogical processes. Future Research

The use of instructional strategies in collegiate leadership education are underdeveloped in the literature and thus a potentially rich area for further research. Moreover, the process of conducting this research and viewing the current state of the leadership teaching and learning literature, a number of


20

opportunities and recommendations for future research have surfaced. While the comparisons among leadership educators and their teaching methods with reference to gender, ethnicity, and other demographic perspectives is endless, other areas offer more holistic merit. Specifically, while this study measured frequency of instructional strategy use, future studies might delve into the quality of their impact, effectiveness, and student learning outcomes. Just because instructors are using this or that instructional strategy frequently does not mean they are using them effectively. Also, does the use of certain instructional strategies actually improve student learning? Research is needed to assess strategies for instructors within the discipline in order to guide and inform to use of teaching methods. This study was also limited to U.S.-based undergraduate face-to-face courses. Research is needed to explore instructional strategy use the global level. Future studies might look at graduate level, non-academic, or even online leadership courses. While this study was the first to explore instructional strategy use in leadership education empirically with such a large sample, research is needed to expound these findings. Lastly, this study also collected data to help describe the participants. One key area was the academic college and department where the academic credit-bearing leadership studies courses were delivered on each campus. An analysis of these data suggests that instructional strategy use varies somewhat depending on what academic area is delivering the leadership course. For example, instructors in business departments used exams, quizzes, research projects/presentation, case studies, and lecture far more frequently than instructors from student affairs. Equally, instructors from student affairs used peer teaching and reflective journals more often than their business counterparts. Research is needed to explore instructional strategy use within academic departments as well as identify best practices for each area.

Conclusions

In closing, the findings from this study offer new knowledge into the instructional attributes—specifically from the instructor’s point of view—of undergraduate academic credit-bearing leadership studies courses. The purpose of this study was to identify the instructional strategies that are most frequently used by instructors when they teach courses in the leadership discipline and identify potential signature pedagogies within the discipline. In the absence of any prior studies exploring instructional strategies from the educators’ perspective, signature pedagogies in the leadership discipline or from an empirical perspective, the findings from this study provided insight in the current state of undergraduate


21

leadership education and identified the instructional strategies most currently utilized.

The most widely used instructional strategies in leadership education were at one time considered limited to approaches that emphasized personal growth, conceptual understanding, feedback, and skill building. Yet, instructors teaching leadership education may succumb to discussion-based and modeling behaviors as much as they also emphasize active and experiential learning strategies. Holistically, leadership education is defined as learning activities and educational environments that are intended to enhanced and foster leadership abilities (Brungardt, 1996). Arguably, this definition is limited. Leadership education can and should do more than enhance and foster leadership abilities in a vacuum. More so, leadership education should be transcendental. Moreover, leadership education is uniquely positioned to prepare future leaders across the disciplines. Regardless of a student’s major or career path, leadership education compliments any academic track and helps prepare students across the disciplines to be leaders in a global society. And it does so in educational environments that model inclusiveness by utilizing inclusive pedagogies.

At the largest level the researcher hopes that institutions, academic departments, and leadership programs will be able to use these findings to evaluate and plan leadership education in meaningful ways. Moreover, it is an aim of this research that future scholars implement workshops, conference sessions, and publications on best practices in instruction within the discipline. At the more scalable level, the researcher hopes these findings will be able to catalyze innovation in leadership education and stimulate new ideas in the classroom. At the very least, these findings should offer attributes that a variety of leadership educators have shared as effective for teaching and learning within the discipline. In addition, the findings from this study may facilitate the development of new leadership programming policies, provide direction for future research, and contribute to the existing body of literature. Incorporating ideas for the sake of quality and innovation in leadership education can offer opportunities for further assessment and research that can contribute both nationally and globally.


22

References

Allen, S. J. (2008). Simulations as a source of learning: using Star Power to teach ethical leadership and management. Journal of Leadership

Education, 7(1), 140-149. Allen, S. J., & Hartman, N. S. (2008a). Leadership development: An exploration

of sources of learning. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 73(1), 10–19, 62.

Allen, S. J., & Hartman, N. S. (2008b). Sources of learning: An exploratory study.

Organization Development Journal, 26(2), 75–87. Allen, S. J., & Hartman, N. S. (2009). Sources of learning in student leadership

development programming. Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(3), 6-16. Avolio, B. (1999). Full leadership development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: A survey of

theory and research. New York: Free Press. Benner, P. E., Sutphen, M., Leonard, V., & Day, L. (2010). Educating nurses: A

call for radical transformation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the

classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1. Washington, DC: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.

Brungardt, C. (1996). The making of leaders: A review of the research in

leadership development and education. The Journal of Leadership Studies,

3(3), 81-95. Burbach, M. E., Matkin, G. S., & Fritz, S. M. (2004). Teaching Critical Thinking

in an Introductory Leadership Course Utilizing Active Learning Strategies: A Confirmatory Study. College Student Journal, 38(3), 482-493.

Buschlen, E. (2009). Can college students learn to lead? An examination of a

collegiate leadership course using the social change model of

leadership. (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (Publication No. AAT 3351998).


23

Conger, J. (1992). Learning to lead: The art of transforming managers into

leaders. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Cooke, M., Irby, D. M., O’Brien, B. C., & Shulman, L. S. (2010). Educating

physicians: A call for reform of medical school and residency. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Wiley.

Cross, K. P. (2002). The role of class discussion in the learning-centered

classroom. The Cross Papers No. 6. Phoenix: League for Innovation in the Community College and Educational Testing Service.

Davis, D. D. (2009). Bringing language to life in second year Spanish. New

Directions for Teaching and Learning, 119, 17-23. Day, V. D. (2000). Leadership development: A review in context. Leadership

Quarterly, 11(4), 581-613. Densten, I. L., & Gray, J. H. (2001). Leadership development and reflection:

What is the connection? The International Journal of Educational

Management, 15(3), 119-124. Dillman, D. A., Tortora, R. D., & Bowker, D. (1999). Principles of constructing

web surveys. SESRC Technical Report, 98-50, Pullman, WA. Retrieved from http://www.websm.org/uploadi/editor/Dillman_1998_Principles_for%20Constructing.pdf

Djajalaksana, Y. (2011). A national survey of instructional strategies used to

teach information systems courses: An exploratory investigation. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (3464628)

Doh, J. P. (2003). Can leadership be taught? Perspectives from management

educators. Academy of Management: Learning & Education, 2(1), 54-67. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40214166

Eich, D. (2008). A grounded theory of high-quality leadership programs:

perspectives from student leadership programs in higher education. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15(2), 176-187.


24

Evans, J. R., & Mathur, A. (2005). “The value of online surveys.” Internet

Research, 15(2), 195-219. Foster, C. R., Dahill, L., Golemon, L., & Tolentino, B. W. (2005). Educating

clergy: Teaching practices and pastoral imagination. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Wiley.

Gifford, G. T. (2010). A modern technology in the leadership classroom: Using

blogs for critical thinking development. Journal of Leadership Education, 9(1), 165-172.

Gurung, R. A., Chick, N. L., & Haynie, A. (Eds.). (2009). Exploring signature

pedagogies: Approaches to teaching disciplinary habits of mind. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

International Leadership Association Directory of Leadership Programs.

Retrieved from http://www.ila-net.org/Resources/LPD/index.htm Jenkins, D. M., & Cutchens, A. B. (2011). Leading critically: A grounded theory

of applied critical thinking in leadership studies. Journal of Leadership

Education, 10(2), 1-21. Jones, C., & Kilburn, B. (2005). Improving leadership pedagogy: organizing

concepts and theories, Midwest Academy of Management 2005 Annual

Conference Proceedings, Retrieved from http://www.midwestacademy.org/Proceedings/2005/index.html

Komives, S. R., Dugan, J. P., Owen, J. E., Slack, C., & Wagner, W. (2006).

Handbook for student leadership programs. College Park, MD: National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs.

Komives, S. R., Lucas, N., & McMahon, T. R. (2007). Exploring leadership: For

college students who want to make a difference (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2007). The leadership challenge (4th ed.). San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass London, M. (2002). Leadership development: Paths to self-insight and

professional growth. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.


25

Moore, L. L. (2010). Students’ attitudes and perceptions about the use of cooperative exams in an introductory leadership class. Journal of

Leadership Education, 9(2), 72-85. Moorhead, G., & Griffin, R. W. (2010). Organizational behavior: Managing

people and organizations. Mason, OH: South-Western. Northouse, P. G. (2010) Leadership: Theory and practice (5th ed.). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage. Parks, D. S. (2005). Leadership can be taught. Boston: Harvard Business

School Press.

Ritch, S. W., & Mengel, T. (2009). Guiding questions: Guidelines for leadership education programs. Journal of Leadership Education. 8(1), 216-226.

Roberts, D. C. (2007). Deeper learning in leadership: Helping college students

find the potential within. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Rost, J. C., & Barker, R. A. (2000). Leadership education in colleges: Toward a

21st century paradigm. The Journal of Leadership Studies, 7(1), 3-12. Scharff, C. (2009). Service learning: Bolstering leadership development while

encouraging personal growth. Theory in Action, 2(3), 80-95. Seemiller, C. (2006). Impacting social change through service learning in an

introductory leadership course. Journal of Leadership Education, 5(2), 41-49. Retrieved from http://bigcat.fhsu.edu/jole/index.html

Sheppard, S. D., Macatangay, K., & Colby, A. (2009). Educating engineers:

Designing for the future of the field. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Shulman, L. S. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the disciplines. Daedalus,

134(3), 52-59. Sogurno, O. A. (2003). Efficacy of role-playing pedagogy in training leaders:

some reflections. Journal of Management Development, 23(4), 355-371. Sullivan, W. M., Colby, A., Wegner, J. W., & Bond, L. (2007). Educating

lawyers: Preparation for the profession of law. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Wiley.


26

Wren, J. T. (Ed.). (1995). Leader’s companion: Insights on leadership through

the ages. New York: The Free Press. Wren, J. T., Riggio, R., & Genovese, M. (2009). Leadership and the liberal arts:

Achieving the promise of a liberal education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations (6th ed.). Saddle River, NJ: Pearson

Education. Zimmerman-Oster, K., & Burkhardt, J. (1999). Leadership in the making: Impact

and insights from leadership development programs in U.S. colleges and universities. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 6(3-4), 50-66.


27

Author Biography Daniel Jenkins, Ph.D., is an Adjunct Professor of Leadership Studies with the Center for Leadership and Civic Engagement and College of Undergraduate Studies as well as an academic advisor for Hospitality Management and B.S. in Applied Science majors at the University of South Florida. He received his doctorate in Curriculum and Instruction with an emphasis in Higher Education Administration and Organizational Leadership from the University of South Florida in 2011. He teaches undergraduate courses in Leadership Theories, Organizational Leadership, and Leadership Fundamentals. His primary research interests include leadership education, pedagogy, diversity and development, college teaching, and higher education policy.


28

The Durable Effects of Short-Term Programs

on Student Leadership Development

Dr. David M. Rosch

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 1401 W. Green St. #290

Urbana, IL 61801 (217) 333-0604

[email protected]

Dr. Arran Caza

Wake Forest University Schools of Business P.O. Box 7285

Winston-Salem, NC 27109 (336) 758 5731 [email protected]

Abstract

Research involving students (N=612) at a large, research-extensive university who participated in voluntary short-term leadership programs showed an increase in leadership capacity, even when measured three months later. A popular assessment tool, the Socially Responsible Leadership Scale (SRLS), was used. Not all leadership competency scores showed significant increase after training, which may indicate that some leadership capacities may be more amenable than others to development through short-term programs. However, most competency scores displayed stronger relationships with each other after training, suggesting that training fostered a more integrated understanding of leadership. In addition, the analysis suggested the need for further study of the SRLS.

Introduction Even a quick glance at many universities’ mission and vision statements reveals the strong focus that professional educators place on leadership education and training (Cress, Astin, Zimmerman-Oster, & Burkhardt, 2001). While the training of society’s future leaders has been a long-standing responsibility of higher education (Boyer, 1987), an increased emphasis on such efforts has been emerging recently on many college campuses (Astin & Astin, 2000; Dugan & Komives, 2007; Dugan, Komives, & Segar, 2009; Lipman-Bluman, 1996). This increasing attention to developing leaders is consistent with current public


29

concerns about leadership. For example, a recent study showed that 80% of United States citizens feel that our society needs more effective leadership to avoid a national decline (Rosenthal, Pittinsky, Purvin, & Montoya, 2007). There seems to be a clear need and desire to develop future leaders focused within training programs on the college campus. However, Avolio, Walumba, and Weber (2009) reported that training leaders is complex, and often very difficult. The range and subtlety of skill required for effective leadership has risen (Astin & Astin, 2000; Eich, 2008). Leaders in contemporary society must competently collaborate with others (Allen & Cherrey, 2000; Lipman-Bluman, 1996), manage emotions (Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002), create positive stress to affect lasting organizational change (Heifetz, Grashow, & Linksy, 2009), and lead with transparency (Seidman, 2007). Engendering these sophisticated skills could be challenging, as many students continue to espouse outdated beliefs about leadership (Astin & Astin, 2000). Research has shown contemporary college students frequently define leadership as engaging in command and control behaviors (Schertzer & Schuh, 2004). This mismatch between students’ expectations and the demands of modern leadership means that training programs must not only support students in skill development, but help them understand the broader need for those skills. Given these needs, several educators have stated that the development of effective leadership programs is one of the most important issues facing education (Astin & Astin, 2000; Lipman-Bluman, 1996; Pearce & Conger, 2003). It is crucial to develop methods that help students to understand and acquire the skills they will need as leaders in contemporary society. Therefore, we examine the effect of a short-term leadership training program that is intended to give college students a more realistic conception of modern leadership. The Face of Modern Leadership

Social structures and work practices have become flatter, more complex, and more relationship-oriented (Komives, Lucas, & McMahon, 2007), demanding corresponding changes in how we think about leadership (Fischer, Overland, & Adams, 2010; Kezar, Carducci, & Contreras-McGavin, 2006). Consistent with this, leadership theory has shifted from the so-called industrial paradigm of focus on hierarchy, control, and division of labor to a post-industrial orientation that emphasizes relationships, networks, trust, ethics, and participation (Kezar et al., 2006; Rost, 1993). Following these theoretical movements, emerging models of leadership development now focus on leadership as a relational process, rather than on leadership as the exercise of hierarchical power. In particular, popular models have focused on the emotional competencies required for creating effective relationships (Goleman et al., 2002), described how leaders work with groups to create adaptive change in organizations and society (Heifetz et al.,


30

2009), and emphasized leader authenticity and integrity (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). Universities’ leadership development programs need to change in a similar fashion. Some efforts have been made to do so (Faris & Outcalt, 2001), but many existing models of leadership development were created within the context of work organizations, and therefore have limited applicability to students in a higher education setting because these models emphasize employee-employer relations within a corporate environment (Komives et al., 2007; Shankman & Allen, 2008). Students require a model more appropriate to their context and priorities (Fincher & Shalka, 2009). The Social Change Model (SCM) of Leadership Development (Astin, 1996) was designed for this purpose. Social Change Model of Leadership Development

The Social Change Model of Leadership Development was created to be a paradigm for leadership development that simultaneously met the needs of higher education and the demands of modern leadership, by emphasizing the importance of relationships, ethics, and sustainable engagement within society (Astin, 1996). The SCM is based on the belief that effective leaders possess a strong and well-developed sense of personal values that link to action, a set of interpersonal and networking skills that incorporate systems thinking and conflict management into the development of trusting teams, and a desire to engage ethically, positively, and sustainably with society (Higher Education Research Institute, 1996). Collectively, these attributes define eight competencies that form the core capacities required for effective modern leadership. These competencies are consciousness of self, congruence, commitment, collaboration, common purpose, controversy with civility, citizenship, and change. These are summarized in Table 1.


31

Table 1 The Eight Capacities within the Social Change Model

Competency Description

Consciousness of Self

One’s awareness of the beliefs, values, attitudes, and emotions that motivate action.

Congruence One’s ability to think, feel, and behave with consistency.

Commitment The psychic energy that motivates one to serve, even during challenging times.

Collaboration The capacity to work with others in a group effort.

Common Purpose The capacity to construct shared aims and values with others.

Controversy with Civility

One’s ability to recognize that differences in viewpoint are inevitable, and then to navigate respectful solutions to those differences.

Citizenship The capacity to become responsibly connected to one’s community.

Change One’s capacity for positive impact on a group and the larger society.

While the SCM has been in existence in its current form and taught in co-curricular programs on college campuses since 1996, until recently research on these programs and co-curricular programs in general has been scarce. Research on Student Leadership Development in Higher Education

Little empirical research had been conducted on student leadership development until a decade ago (Zimmerman-Oster & Burkhardt, 1999). Recent studies conducted on the impact of comprehensive leadership programs in college indicated moderate benefits from structured efforts at leadership skill development. For example, in a national study spanning several institutions, students who participated in specific leadership interventions, in the form of short-term trainings, workshops, or retreats, displayed higher levels of responsibility and multicultural awareness, as well as a deeper sense of both personal and societal values (Cress et al., 2001). The Multi-Institutional Study of Leadership (MSL) included a series of national studies of on-campus leadership development, and highlighted the significant degree to which participation in structured leadership programs predicted better scores on leadership efficacy and practice (Dugan & Komives, 2007). Moreover, such programs predicted higher levels of skill in related areas, such as practicing community service and engaging in socio-political discussion with peers (Segar, Hershey, & Dugan, 2008).


32

While there has been growing evidence that structured leadership programs can benefit students’ leadership ability, less is currently known about the best method for making such interventions (Posner, 2009). As Posner pointed out, “Despite the plethora of leadership programs scattered across college campuses, scant empirical investigation has been conducted into the benefits of such education efforts” (p. 551). Particularly, evidence for the benefits of short-term interventions (e.g., a retreat or day-long training) in helping students acquire necessary leadership attitudes and skills has been limited, especially when compared to long-term programs (e.g., an academic course or multi-semester certificate program). Posner and Rosenberger (1998) reported that students in leadership positions who participated in a short-term leadership training displayed behaviors comparable to those of students engaged in a semester-long program. Similarly, initial results from the first year of the MSL showed that short-term training interventions produced effects similar to longer-term interventions, which were to increase leadership abilities relative to those of students with no such intervention (Dugan & Komives, 2007). Moreover, in related findings, a multi-institutional study of students from colleges across Eastern Europe found that factors such as the creation of a sense of community within a program and students’ sense of belonging were more significant than the structure of the training intervention to the participants’ subsequent practice of effective leadership (Humphreys, 2007). Taken together, these findings suggest that short-term training may be an effective intervention option for developing students’ leadership. Nonetheless, more must be done to understand the specific effects that particular programs have on learning, particularly since most prior research has been cross-sectional, and thus not taken account of the effects of change over time. Thus far, we have noted that there is a growing emphasis on leadership development among college students, particularly in response to the observation that the demands of modern leadership have changed. The need for intervention is increased by the observation that how naïve students think about leadership may not be appropriate for the requirements of modern leadership. Some studies have suggested that short-term leadership development programs can be effective, but these studies have relied primarily on comparisons between groups at a single point in time, which leaves uncertainty about the long-term effectiveness of short programs. In response, this study examined the durability of effects from a short-term training intervention on students’ leadership competencies by addressing the following questions:

• Does a short-term program lead to significant differences in how participants score on the SCM assessment?

• Do any of the observed changes last? Does the effect of a short-term program persist?


33

Method Population

This study was conducted with leadership development participants at a large public university in the Midwestern United States. An office on this campus, which we will call the Leadership Center, served as a campus-wide hub for leadership development programs, and espoused a philosophy of leadership consistent with that in the SCM. The Leadership Center’s primary objective was to teach students a comprehensive set of skills necessary for competence within the SCM, and the principal means of delivering this education was to offer short-term programs that were open to all students regardless of prior training, academic major, or involvement level on campus. Participants in this study were drawn from the population of students who registered for one of five short-term leadership programs at the Leadership Center. Each program lasted for an average of eight hours, and each program was open to any interested student. While each one of the five programs was offered at multiple times during the year, students could participate in any particular program only once. The five programs each focused on a different aspect of leadership skills: self-awareness, interpersonal skills, ethics and integrity, organizational effectiveness, and transitional leadership skills. In each program, students had the opportunity to learn theory relevant to the skill set being taught, practice the requisite skills, and reflect upon their learning through individual journaling and small-group discussion. These programs were free, and students received no academic credit for participating.

Sample

The sample for this study consisted of 612 students drawn from participants in the Leadership Center’s programs from 2007-2010. Of these, 95% (n=583) participated in only one program, while the remainder (n=29) participated in two. Overall, 65% of the sample was female. Caucasian students represented 57% of the sample, while African-American (8%), Latino (6%), Asian-American (13%) and international students (15%) comprised the remainder. Participants were spread across all class years. The largest proportion was comprised of freshman (32%), while sophomores (21%), juniors (24%), seniors (16%) and graduate students (8%) were also represented. Students from each of the major colleges within the university participated. Within this sample, women and freshman were overrepresented compared to overall university student demographics, while men and seniors were underrepresented.


34

Data Collection

Data were collected from three different groups of program participants. Group I data were collected before participation in the leadership program. Students who were assigned to Group I after registering to attend a Leadership Center program were invited to complete an online survey prior to the program. A total of 194 surveys were completed, corresponding to a response rate of 51%. Students assigned to Group II were invited to complete the survey immediately after their participation in one of the leadership programs. Among these students, a total of 219 surveys were completed (response rate 31%). Students assigned to Group III were invited to complete the survey three months after completing the leadership program. We received 199 surveys from this group (response rate 28%). The overall response rate was 34% across all groups, which is consistent with response rates seen in online survey research (Couper, 2000). As well, the demographic characteristics of those who completed surveys were not significantly different than those of Leadership Center participants who did not. We collected data for each group at multiple times during the three years of this study, to be sure that all five Leadership Center programs were equally represented in the three groups. Data collection periods are summarized in Table 2. This rotating data collection process resulted in a series of “snapshots” of students’ self-reported competencies at different periods of participation in a system of short-term leadership development programs. Therefore, the structure of the data allow for between-person comparisons, rather than within-person or test-retest analysis. Nonetheless, because participants were randomly assigned to groups, there is no a priori reason to believe there are significant differences between respondents in each group. Therefore, the responses in each group should be representative of all individuals at that phase of leadership training, which allows for comparison across the time-lagged cross-sectional snapshots. Instrumentation

Participants completed an online survey asking a variety of demographic questions (race, gender, class year, academic college), and including the Socially


35

Table 2 Data collection periods 2007-2010

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010

Fall Winter Spring Fall Winter Spring Fall Winter Spring

Group I – Pre-test X

X

X

Group II – Post-test X

X

X

Group III – Lagged post

X

X

X

Responsible Leadership Scale (SRLS), a 68-item instrument designed to measure the self-reported SCM leadership capacities of participants (Higher Education Research Institute, 1996; Slack, 2006). Items on the SRLS used a five-point Likert-scale ranging from “Strongly Disagree” through “Neutral” to “Strongly Agree” and referred to participants’ attitudes or abilities with regard to one of the eight competencies of the SCM (e.g., agreement with the statement that “creativity can come from conflict” measured the ‘controversy with civility’ capacity). Previous work has shown that reliability scores for the SRLS ranges from .75 on the “controversy with civility” scale to .82 on “commitment” (Dugan & Komives, 2010). The SRLS has been used as the leadership effectiveness instrument of choice in an emerging national study of the effects of college involvement on student leadership development that annually includes over 100 colleges and universities and 50,000 student participants – the Multi-Institutional Study of Leadership (Dugan & Komives, 2007). It has been used to examine differences in leadership practices across gender, race, and sexual orientation (Dugan, Komives, & Segar, 2008), the effects of college involvement on leadership success (Dugan, 2006), and the effects of mentoring on effective leadership practices (Jabaji, Slife, Dugan, & Komives, 2008), as well as with students outside the United States (Humphreys, 2007). Data Analysis

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using maximum likelihood estimation structural equation models. CFA was used to test the convergent and discriminant validity of the SRLS competencies, as well to compare the factor structure among sample groups (i.e., Groups I, II and III). The length of the full SRLS instrument (68 items) implied a large number of parameter estimates in an unconstrained model, more than was appropriate for estimation given the available sample size (MacCallum, Browne, & Sugawara, 1996). To address this problem, we opted against item parceling, so as to maximize the rigor of the scale


36

analysis (Bagozzi & Heatherton, 1994). Instead, we used an iterative split-sample modeling approach (Kline, 1998) which involved using half of the participant responses to identify the subset of items for each competency that best fit the data. We limited the CFA to these items and the resulting model was then tested for appropriate fit in the remainder of the participant sample, in order to reduce the risk of capitalizing on chance (McDonald & Marsh, 1990). The final CFA model was subsequently used in a group-based comparison across the three phases to test for similarities and differences in the pattern of responses. All fit decisions were based on the criteria suggested by Hu and Bentler (1999).

Results Basic descriptive statistics for the survey responses are provided in Table 3. The values in Table 3 were calculated using the entire 68-item scale for comparability with previous studies, and the values are consistent with those reported by others (Dugan, 2006; Dugan & Komives, 2007). For parsimony, all further results reported are from the final CFA model that was adopted. Table 3 Descriptive statistics

M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 Change 3.86 .43 .76

2 Citizenship 4.15 .46 .54 .85

3 Collaboration 4.19 .41 .57 .59 .78

4 Commitment 4.46 .42 .38 .47 .57 .77

5 Common purpose

4.21 .39 .50 .63 .71 .56 .81

6 Congruence 4.23 .43 .38 .51 .53 .60 .58 .79

7 Consciousness 3.97 .48 .48 .43 .53 .49 .50 .57 .76

8 Controversy with civility

3.98 .37 .65 .48 .60 .49 .46 .37 .44 .70

Cronbach’s alpha in diagonal. All correlations significant (p<.05) N= 612

As explained in the description of the analysis, all 68 items of the SRLS were not used in the final model. Moreover, the proposed eight-factor structure of the SCM was not observed in the data; several of the competencies had correlations too high to support their discriminant validity as independent factors (Bagozzi & Edwards, 1998). Rather, a six-factor structure was found to be more appropriate, consisting of items associated with the competencies of congruence, commitment, common purpose, controversy with civility, citizenship, and change (see Table 4). The data did not support the discriminant validity of the consciousness of self and collaboration competencies.


37

Our final result was a model comprised of the six competencies in Table 4. This model was a statistically appropriate representation of the data (Χ2

120=255.70, CFI=0.96, RMSEA=0.04, SRMR=0.04). All items in the table displayed good measurement properties. In terms of convergent validity – the extent to which the competencies could be recognized in the data – the model performed well (all Table 4 Final six-competency factor structure and items

Competency Retained SRLS items Α

Citizenship I believe I have responsibilities to my community I believe I have a civic responsibility to the greater public I value opportunities that allow me to contribute to my community

.79

Commitment I hold myself accountable for responsibilities I agree to I can be counted on to do my part I follow through on my promises

.78

Congruence My actions are consistent with my values My behaviors are congruent with my beliefs My behaviors reflect my beliefs

.82

Controversy with Civility

I am open to others’ ideas I value differences in others I respect opinions other than my own

.73

Common Purpose

It is important to develop a common direction in a group in order to get anything done Common values drive an organization I work well when I know the collective values of a group

.71

Change Change makes me uncomfortable (reverse coded) I work well in changing environments New ways of doing things frustrate me (reverse coded)

.72

factor loadings in excess of the recommended minimum of 0.5; Chin, 1998). The model also performed well in terms of discriminant validity, which is the extent to which competencies could be distinguished from each other (the largest correlation among factors was 0.52; Bagozzi & Edwards, 1998). The final model had equally good measurement properties within each training group: Group I, before training (Χ2

120=205.03, CFI=0.91, RMSEA=0.06, SRMR=0.06); Group II, immediately after training (Χ2

120=174.28, CFI=0.95, RMSEA=.0.05,


38

SRMR=0.05); and Group III, three months after training (Χ2120=211.78,

CFI=0.92, RMSEA=.0.06, SRMR=0.06). In all cases, the results met the criteria for good fit, indicating that the final model is an appropriate interpretation of the data (Hu & Bentler, 1999). The next step of the analysis was a group-based comparison to test for differences in their responses. The first comparison was between Groups I and II, which assessed possible differences in the respondents’ leadership model and self-reported competencies before and after training. The first model we tested constrained both groups to have identical measurement models (i.e., same factor structure, same factor loadings, same measurement intercepts). As shown in Table 5 (see Model 1) this model had an acceptable fit with the data, suggesting that respondents’ mental models of leadership before and after training had the same six-competency factor structure, meaning that students grouped their response patterns similarly both before and after attending the training sessions. Models 2 and 3 then required further equivalence between the two groups’ responses; specifically that the two groups have the same mean levels in the competencies (Model 2) and the same correlations among the competencies (Model 3). Both of these models had significantly worse fits with the data, as indicated by the significant increase in their Χ2 score, relative to Model 1. Table 5 Alternative models in group comparison

Model Samples Equivalence comparison

Χ2(df)

∆Χ2

(df) CFI RMSEA SRMR

1

Groups I & II

Factor structure

398.96 (264)

-- .94 .03 .06

2 Factor means

412.99 (270)

14.03 (6)*

.93 .04 .06

3 Factor

correlations 448.47 (291)

35.48 (21)*

.92 .04 .08

4

Groups II & III

Factor structure

412.90 (264)

-- .93 .04 .05

5 Factor means

419.02 (270)

6.12 (6)

.93 .04 .05

6 Factor

correlations 437.05 (291)

18.03 (21)

.94 .03 .06

* p<.05 The worse fit of Model 2 indicates that there were significant differences in the mean levels of some competencies among respondents in the two groups. Specifically, respondents reported significantly higher competency in


39

commitment (Cohen’s d=.40), common purpose (d=.20), controversy with civility (d=.22), and citizenship (d=.17) after training (p<.05). These are small to moderate effects that suggest that immediately after training participants felt more competent in these areas than they did before training. There was no difference between Groups I and II in their reported competency with congruence or change. Further, the worse fit of Model 3 indicates that there were significant differences in the correlation structures between groups, implying that the respondents perceived different relationships among the competencies before and after training. As shown in Table 6, most Pearson’s r correlations were higher after training (i.e., in Group II), which suggests that the participants considered the competencies to be more interrelated and closely linked after training. The final step in the analysis was to compare the responses of Groups II and III. As shown in Model 4 of Table 5, constraining these two groups to have identical Table 6 Correlations among competencies before and after training (Phase I score/Phase

II score)

1 2 3 4 5

1 Change

2 Citizenship .29/.52

3 Commitment .32/.41 .12/.46

4 Common purpose

.20/25 .41/.44 .18/.57

5 Congruence .08/.39 .23/.49 .49/.53 .39/40

6 Controversy with civility

.40/.54 .33/41 .36/.36 .36/.20 .15/.16

Note: All correlations > 0.21 are significant (p<.05) measurement models yielded a good fit with the data. Moreover, the results of Models 5 and 6 indicate that the two groups had similar means and correlations among the competencies; there were no significant differences. These results suggest that participants reported similar levels of competency and similar mental models of leadership immediately after training and three months later. Combined with the previous results, this shows that the short-term training had a lasting effect on the participants: immediately after training, participants reported higher levels of competency and perceived stronger links among the competencies, and these increases persisted for at least three months.


40

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of short-term leadership programs on students’ self-reported scores on an assessment of SCM competencies. The results indicate that there may be many areas of leadership development that can be addressed through participation in short-term training programs. Moreover, the results suggest that the increased scores persist over time. Three months after training, participants still retained the effects they showed immediately after training. An additional interesting finding was that the correlations among SCM competencies generally increased after participation, pointing to the possibility of a more integrated understanding of the skills required for effective post-industrial leadership. However, all of these findings should be interpreted with the caveat that there may be issues to be resolved concerning the psychometric properties of the Socially Responsible Leadership Scale (SRLS), since the predicted eight-factor structure could not be extracted from the data. Nonetheless, these results provide empirical evidence that students can derive lasting benefits from participating in short-term leadership training, and indicate important directions for future research and the potential structure of leadership programs. Previous studies (Healy, 2000; Rosch & Schwartz, 2009; Schuh & Upcraft, 1998) have shown the existence of a honeymoon effect in self-reported assessment of skill immediately after an educational experience, such that students overestimate the impact of their learning compared to a measurement taken months later. In this study, student scores remained elevated relative to pre-program results three months after training, and were equal to the gains seen immediately after the program. This persistence corroborates past research (Dugan & Komives, 2007), indicating the durable benefit of students attending short-term leadership interventions. The results seem to show that well-structured short-term programs can impact student leadership practices long after attendance. At the same time, the results also signify that not all areas of leadership competency are similarly affected by such programs. Specifically, while students reported greater competency on measures of capacity for commitment, common purpose, controversy with civility, and citizenship, there was no apparent effect from training on their capacity for congruence or change. This difference may indicate that some skills required for socially responsible leadership are more amenable to training within a single, short program (e.g., team development, values prioritization, discussion facilitation, and conflict management skills). In contrast, mastering more complex skills such as moral reasoning and systems thinking (i.e., skills required for the effective practice of congruence and change) may be better accomplished in a long-term educational structure, such as an


41

academic course or multi-semester leadership certificate program. The fact that perceived acquisition of some SCM competencies appears to occur from participation in short-term programs while others do not may have important implications for the curriculum included in co-curricular educational programs, which are often based on short-term interventions such as evening workshops or weekend retreats. The other interesting pattern in the findings was that most of the correlations among the SCM competencies increased and remained elevated after leadership training. This may indicate that, in addition to any changes in individuals’ particular competencies, leadership training programs may promote more integrated thinking about all of the skills required to lead in complex, modern contexts. For example, as students become more proficient at the practice of gaining consensus for group action (i.e., common purpose), they may also gain a better sense of the comprehensive knowledge, skills, and attitudes required to stay committed to personal goals in the face of opposition, manage interpersonal conflict, and embrace diversity in groups. Even though the training did not appear to contribute to increased scores in the competencies of congruence and change, post-training participants generally reported higher correlations among these and other competencies. These higher correlations may indicate that even though their reported skill does not increase, students may leave a well-designed short-term leadership program with a more integrated understanding of what is required to exercise congruence or manage a complex change process. While students may not be able to master these more complex skills within a short-term program, they may still receive meaningful gains in knowledge about these competencies. Finally, the results also have potential implications for the use of the Socially Responsible Leadership Scale (SRLS) as an assessment tool in leadership programs. Despite its increasing popularity in assessing student leadership development, little psychometric research has been published on the SRLS beyond exploratory factor analysis. While the Cronbach’s alpha score for each competency was similar to that found in past research (Dugan, 2006; Dugan & Komives, 2007), further analysis indicated a lack of convergent and discriminant validity among the competencies, requiring post-hoc deletion of scale items and competencies. While we were able to develop a valid model that was consistent with six of the SCM competencies, additional research might examine the psychometric properties of the SRLS in detail and in diverse samples of students.


42

Implications for Policy and Practice

These results show evidence that one-shot programs can serve as effective tools for lasting leadership development, but that not all leadership skills are acquired at the same speed or in the context of such programs. The addition of academic courses or long-term certificate programs in leadership development is human resource-heavy and time intensive; therefore, using short-term programs that can effectively educate students may be more fiscally efficient and can provide a means to scale up new initiatives in a potentially more cost-effective and quicker fashion. Our results reveal the efficacy of such programs for some competencies. Still, leadership educators in student affairs should be intentional with the design of their overall suite of programs, ensuring that the complexity that accompanies several contemporary leadership skills is adequately addressed through longer-term programs and initiatives. The SCM capacity of change, for example, may require mastery of the concept of effective systems-thinking. Such mastery requires the successful identification of stakeholders, building relationships with diverse others, testing one’s assumptions, and creating effective feedback loops (Conger & Benjamin, 1999). Acquiring the skills to successfully create systemic change in contemporary systems may not be realistic in the scope of a one-day program. These results also suggest that even if students do not leave short-term programs perceiving that they possess the skills necessary to practice complex leadership actions, they may acquire a more integrated sense of thinking about leadership. For example, some students may not leave a program more competent in matching their words and actions (i.e., the SCM capacity of congruence); however, they may recognize the important role that their personal values (i.e., the SCM capacity of consciousness of self) play in such behavior. This may have important implications for student affairs leadership educators and how they structure the programs they offer. Many leadership programs are marketed as discrete skill-building opportunities rather than as parts of a complex whole of leadership capacity-building. The educational impact of these programs may be increased by explicitly providing students with a more holistic picture of how the skills they are learning are connected to related skills for leading others. Moreover, the creation of a linked set of short-term programs, where students build skill in one area first before advancing to master a more complex skill, may aid administrators in effectively creating a comprehensive leadership development initiative. Limitations, Future Research, and Conclusions

This study had several important limitations. Significantly, these results are based on students at a single four-year research-extensive public university in the


43

Midwest, all of whom volunteered to participate in relatively short training programs that took place on the weekends or over summer and winter breaks. While this sample of students was demographically representative of the general student body at that particular campus, the ability to generalize results to a more national or global population of students may be limited by the single-institution population, the fact that all participants were self-selected volunteers, and the nature of the programs in question. Consequently, more research involving multi-campus student populations and programs of varying lengths should be conducted to better understand the impact of short-term training on student leadership development. Additionally, the post-participation element of the study design was limited to three months, thus constraining the degree to which conclusions about long-term effects can be drawn. The field of leadership development in higher education suffers from a paucity of research that examines true longitudinal change in student abilities (Komives, Owen, Longerbeam, Mainella, & Osteen, 2005; Posner, 2009). While this research began to address this problem, more efforts must be made in assessing the leadership gains of students over time. A specific direction that should be addressed in future research is the difference between knowledge, skills, and attitudes in post-industrial leadership development. While the SRLS is an assessment of self-reported skills, future research could examine how students develop and grow in each of these three areas, and the relationships among them. In conclusion, our results show that while short-term training is a viable option for student affairs educators in helping students develop leadership skills, not all relevant skills may be appropriately addressed and mastered in a short-term program. More research must be conducted to understand which types of leadership skills can best be fostered in students through short programs, and which skills may be better left to long-term programming initiatives. As campuses are increasingly pressed to become more efficient and better stewards of existing financial and human resources, such knowledge would aid leadership educators in creating the most benefit from their efforts.


44

References Allen, K. E., & Cherrey, C. (2000). Systemic leadership: Enriching the meaning

of our work. Lanham, MD: American College Personnel Association and National Association for Campus Activities: University Press of America.

Astin, A. A., & Astin, H. S. (2000). Leadership reconsidered: Engaging higher

education in social change. Battle Creek, MI: W. K. Kellogg Foundation. Astin, H. S. (1996). Leadership for Social Change. About Campus, 1(3), 4-10. Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development:

Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. Leadership Quarterly,

16(3), 315-338. Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Weber, T. J. (2009). Leadership: Current

theories, research, and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 421-449.

Bagozzi, R. P., & Edwards, J. R. (1998). A general approach to representing

constructs in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods,

1(1), 45-87. Bagozzi, R. P., & Heatherton, T. F. (1994). A general approach to representing

multifaceted personality constructs: Application to state self-esteem. Structural Equation Modeling, 1(1), 35-67.

Boyer, E. L. (1987). College: The Undergraduate Experience in America. New

York: Harper and Row. Chin, W. W. (1998). Commentary: Issues and opinion on structural equation

modeling. MIS Quarterly, 22(1). Conger, J. A., & Benjamin, B. (1999). Building Leaders: How Successful

Companies Develop the Next Generation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Couper, M. P. (2000). Web Surveys: A review of issues and approaches. Public

Opinion Quarterly, 64(4), 464-494. Cress, C. M., Astin, H., Zimmerman-Oster, K., & Burkhardt, J. C. (2001).

Developmental outcomes of college students' involvement in leadership activities. Journal of College Student Development, 42(1), 15-27.


45

Dugan, J. P. (2006). Explorations using the social change model: Leadership

development among college men and women. Journal of College Student

Development, 47(2), 217-225. Dugan, J. P., & Komives, S. R. (2007). Developing leadership capacity in college

students: Findings from a national study. A report from the Multi-Institutional Study of Leadership. College Park, MD: National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs.

Dugan, J. P., & Komives, S. R. (2010). Influences on college students' capacities

for socially responsible leadership. Journal of College Student

Development, 51(5), 525-549. Dugan, J. P., Komives, S. R., & Segar, T. C. (2009). College Student capacity for

socially responsible leadership: Understanding norms and influences of race, gender, and sexual orientation. NASPA Journal, 45(4), 475-500.


Perspectives from student leadership development programs in higher education. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 15(2), 176.

Fincher, J., & Shalka, T. R. (2009). Co-curricular leadership education:

Considering critical questions. Journal of Leadership Education, 8(1), 228-237.

Fischer, D. V., Overland, M., & Adams, L. (2010). Leadership attutudes and

beliefs of incoming first-year students. Journal of Leadership Education,

9(1), 1-16. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing

the power of emotional intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Healy, M. A. (2000). Knowing What Works: Program Evaluation. New

Directions for Student Services, 2000(90), 57-65. doi: 10.1002/ss.9005 Heifetz, R., Grashow, A., & Linksy, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive

leadership: Tools and tactics for changing your organization and the

world. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press.


46

Higher Education Research Institute (1996). A social change model of leadership

development (Version III). Los Angeles: University of California Higher Education Research Institute.

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance

structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.

Humphreys, M. J. (2007). Predictors of socially responsible leadership:

Application of the social change model to an Eastern European

undergraduate population. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Azusa Pacific University.

Kezar, A. J., Carducci, R., & Contreras-McGavin, M. (2006). Rethinking the "L"

Word in Higher Education: The Revolution in Research in Higher

Education (Vol. 31). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling:

Guilford Press. Komives, S. R., Lucas, N., & McMahon, T. (2007). Exploring Leadership: For

College Students Who Want to Make a Difference, 2nd Edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Komives, S. R., Owen, J. E., Longerbeam, S. D., Mainella, F. C., & Osteen, L.

(2005). Developing a leadership identity: A grounded theory. Journal of

College Student Development, 46(6), 593-611. Lipman-Bluman, J. (1996). Connective Leadership: Managing in a changing

world. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis

and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130-149.

McDonald, R. P., & Marsh, H. W. (1990). Choosing a multivariate model:

Noncentrality and goodness of fit. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 247-255.

Pearce, C. L., & Conger, J. A. (2003). Shared leadership: Reframing the hows

and whys of leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.


47

Posner, B. Z. (2009). A longitudinal study examining changes in students leadership behavior. Journal of College Student Development, 50(5), 551-563.

Posner, B. Z., & Rosenberger, J. (1998). The impact of situational factors on

students' leadership development behaviors. Unpublished manuscript. Santa Clara University.

Rosch, D. M., & Schwartz, L. M. (2009). Potential issues and pitfalls in outcomes

assessment in leadership education. Journal of Leadership Education,

8(1), 177-194. Rosenthal, S. A., Pittinsky, T. L., Purvin, D. M., & Montoya, R. M. (2007).

National Leadership Index 2007: A national study of confidence in leadership. U.S. News and World Report.

Rost, J. C. (1993). Leadership for the 21st Century. Westport, CT.: Praeger

Publishers. Schertzer, J. E., & Schuh, J. H. (2004). College student perceptions of leadership:

Empowering and constraining beliefs. NASPA Journal, 42(1), 111-131. Schuh, J. H., & Upcraft, M. L. (1998). Facts and myths about assessment in

student affairs. About Campus, 3(5), 2. Segar, T. C., Hershey, K., & Dugan, J. P. (2008). Socio-cultural conversations:

The power of engagement across difference. Concepts & Connections: A

Publication for Leadership Educators, 15(4), 9-10. Seidman, D. (2007). How we do anything means everything: In business and in

life. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Shankman, M. L., & Allen, S. J. (2008). Emotionally Intelligent Leadership: A

Guide of College Students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Zimmerman-Oster, K., & Burkhardt, J. C. (1999). Leadership in the Making:

Impact and Insights from Leadership Development Programs in U.S.

Colleges and Universities. Battle Creek, MI: Kellogg Foundation.


48

Author Biographies David M. Rosch serves as an Assistant Professor in the Agricultural Education program at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. His particular areas of interest include student leadership development and the accurate assessment of leadership effectiveness. He earned his doctorate in Higher Education Administration from Syracuse University in 2007, a master's in Student Affairs in Higher Education from Colorado State University in 1999, and a bachelor's degree from Binghamton University (NY) in 1996. Arran Caza is an Assistant Professor of Business Administration in the Wake Forest University Schools of Business. He earned his doctorate at the University of Michigan and is a research affiliate of the New Zealand Leadership Institute. Arran’s research focuses on leaders and followers in organizations, with a particular emphasis on how leaders’ discretionary behaviors influence follower outcomes.


49

Impact of Personal Growth Projects on Leadership

Identity Development

Summer F. Odom

Assistant Professor Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education, and Communications

Texas A&M University 2116 TAMU

College Station, TX 77843-2116 [email protected]

(979) 862-7650

Barry L. Boyd

Associate Professor Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education, and Communications


College Station, TX 77843-2116 [email protected]

(979) 862-3693

Jennifer Williams



College Station, TX 77843-2116 [email protected] (979) 862-1423

Abstract

Within personal leadership education courses, leadership educators should include experiences which help students develop themselves as leaders. In this article, the authors discuss results from a qualitative research study involving the analysis of Personal Growth Project (PGP) assignments in a personal leadership education collegiate course. The authors analyzed PGP assignments using the lens of the Leadership Identity Development model (Komives et al., 2005). All aspects of the developing self component of the model including deepening self-awareness, building self-confidence, establishing interpersonal efficacy, applying new skills,


50

and expanding motivations were evident in student reflections about their PGP. The PGP assignment seems to be very effective in promoting the development of students’ leadership identity, especially in the “developing self” category of the Leadership Identity Model (Komives et al., 2005).

Introduction

“Personal growth is such an interesting thing that it almost isn’t fully learned or understood until after the season of growth.” (Student B19)

Boyd and Williams (2010) identified a classroom assignment in a personal leadership education collegiate course designed to foster life-long learning in students. Students in this course are required to complete a personal growth project where they learn a new skill or gain new knowledge. Students are allowed to choose their project with the approval of the instructor. The students must choose to learn something completely new. Examples of projects include learning a musical instrument, learning to cook, learning a new physical activity such as yoga, or expanding their spiritual awareness. Students document and reflect on their personal growth throughout the project and connect course content to their personal growth process. Course content includes topics such as emotional intelligence, personality type, strengths, values, life purpose, creativity, and personal vision. Beyond fostering life-long learning skills, there are other beneficial outcomes to the personal growth project assignment such as developing self- awareness. As leadership development is mostly personal development, becoming more aware of one’s self is a necessary component of personal development (Day, Zaccaro, & Halpin, 2004). To effectively lead others, one must first be able to lead themselves (Neck & Manz, 2007). “The instrument of leadership is the self, and the mastery of the art of leadership comes from the mastery of the self” (p. 344). Being aware of your strengths and weaknesses, what you value and believe, and your preferences for learning, thinking, and relating help you relate to others and establish credibility in those relationships (Komives, Lucas, & McMahon, 2006). Leadership occurs in the context of interpersonal relationships. Interpersonal skill development enhances our capacity to lead others as we learn from our experiences, acquire new skills, and develop our self-concept (Fritz, Brown, Lunde, & Banset, 2004). Interpersonal skill development is really about discovering who you are. This self-discovery which leads to self-confidence is “really awareness of and faith in your own powers. These powers become clear and strong only as you work to identify and develop them” (Kouzes & Posner,


51

1990, p. 298). Because people are not fully conscious of all aspects of their identities (Day et al., 2004), leadership educators should help students become aware of the components of their self and develop a deeper self-awareness of the individual. This paper discusses the impact of using Personal Growth Projects (PGPs) to help students “develop self” in a personal leadership education collegiate course. Students’ reflections from completing a personal growth project were analyzed using the Leadership Identity Development model as the framework (Komives, Owen, Longerbeam, Mainella, & Osteen, 2005).

Literature Review and Conceptual Framework

London (2009) describes leadership development as a process contributing to continuous growth of the person. One of the four primary components to leadership development is personal growth (Conger, 1992). An integral part of the development process is the concept of continuous learning. London states that continuous learning is imperative if leaders are to keep up with the rapid pace of technological change and the expansion of the global economy. London and Smither (1999) defined continuous learning as “a self-initiated, discretionary, planned, and proactive pattern of formal or informal activities that are sustained over time for the purpose of applying or transporting knowledge for career development’’ ( p. 81). Leadership educators should try to foster continuous learning experiences in students to help them develop as leaders. One way to do this is through experiential learning activities such as the PGP. Kolb (1984) described experiential learning as a process which links education, work, and personal development. Kolb’s model, based on the work of Dewey (1938), Lewin (1958), and Piaget (1970), revolves around four key points in cyclical form. First, individuals have a concrete experience, which is followed by reflective observations, abstract conceptualizations, and active experimentation (Kolb, 1984). Each point is unique to the learner’s experience. Giving learners an opportunity to reflect on and observe experiences is key to learning in Kolb’s model (1984). PGPs allow students to experience something new (concrete experience), reflect on their experience and what they learned (reflective observations), state changes they foresee or may encounter (abstract conceptualizations), and apply it to other aspects of their life (active experimentation). By purposefully constructing the PGP assignment, leadership educators create an experiential learning activity for students.


52

Based on grounded theory research, the Komives et al. (2005) model for developing a leadership identity is a useful framework for assessing the effect of PGPs on student learning and development. Komives et al. proposed a model for developing a leadership identity based on an emergent design. This study linked student development theories with the process of leadership development to build a model for assisting leadership educators in facilitating leadership development in students. In the study by Komives et al., a sample of students who exemplified relational leadership were identified and interviewed to arrive at the process of developing a leadership identity. In the Leadership Identity Development (LID) model, six stages of the developmental process were identified as leadership constructs (Komives et al., 2005):

• Awareness.

• Exploration/Engagement.

• Leader Identified.

• Leadership Differentiated.

• Generativity.

• Integration/Synthesis.

“Leadership identity develops through six stages moving from awareness to integration/synthesis” (Komives et al., 2005, pp. 608-609). These stages are conceptualized as cyclical, which allows for individuals to go between stages and repeat stages, learning and acquiring information through each repeated stage. Five organizational categories also emerged for the process of developing leadership identity:

• Developmental influences.

• Developing self.

• Group influences.

• Changing view of self with others.


53

• Broadening view of leadership.

Developing self, one of the categories emergent in Komives et al. (2005) study, was the focus of this research study. Dimensions of personal growth were evident in the developing self category, which includes “deepening self-awareness, building self-confidence, establishing interpersonal efficacy, applying new skills, and expanding motivations” (p. 599). Deepening self-awareness involves moving from having a vague sense of self to affirming your strengths, weaknesses, and roles in which you thrive. According to George (2007), members of the Stanford Graduate School of Business Advisory Council listed self-awareness unanimously as the “most important capability for leaders to develop” (p. 69). Self-awareness includes affirmation of personal values, sense of personal integrity, strengths, and weaknesses. Self-confidence evolves through meaningful experiences, which support a positive self-concept. This self-confidence results in taking more risks and a feeling of empowerment (Komives et al., 2005). Learning to “relate to and communicate with people different from themselves” (Komives et al., 2005, p. 601) is a part of establishing interpersonal efficacy. By working closely with others who are different from you, an appreciation of diverse points of view and the valuing of different perspectives occur. Applying new skills occurred as a result of being involved in different experiences. Public speaking skills, delegating, motivating, team-building, facilitating, and listening skills are examples of new skills which can be acquired due to engagement in multiple experiences (Komives et al., 2005). While making friends or participating in interesting activities was an initial reason to get involved in experiences, as students gained more experience, their goals were refined and their focus changed to that of seeking out those things which meant something to them. Their experiences sparked a “deep sense of commitment to something and knew that passion would be a strong motivation to action” (Komives et al., 2005, p. 602). Expanding motivations includes following your passion or interest, exploring and engaging in a concept beyond the initial introduction to it. There is very little empirical research found in the literature regarding the leadership identity development model. Furthermore, research on the leadership identity development model focuses on how students developed their leadership identity. For instance, Oldham (2008) focused on the “unique collegiate experiences of African American students at a predominantly White institution,


54

with the intent of finding avenues to further support not only their academic journeys, but also their personal growth and development” (p. 108). This research study focused on the use of a collegiate course assignment in helping students develop self. While theory is useful in describing, explaining, and predicting student behavior, influencing student development is the ultimate goal of leadership education and practice (McEwen, 2003). Komives et al. (2009) recommended that “all leadership courses and other educational experiences should integrate opportunities for self-awareness and personal assessment that were critical to the development in each of the LID stages” (p. 37). The use of PGPs promotes leadership identity development in students by providing experiences from which they can develop their sense of self. Through their PGPs, students are challenged to participate in an experience which takes them out of their comfort zone and creates new conditions and contexts from which to grow. By reflecting on these new experiences, students deepen their self-awareness, build self-confidence, establish interpersonal efficacy, apply new skills, and expand their motivations.

Methodology Understanding how a leadership identity is formed is a severely multifarious phenomenon. According to Conger (1998), qualitative research “can be the richest of studies, often illuminating in radically new ways phenomena as complex as leadership” (p. 107). Basic qualitative methodology was chosen as the most effective means to investigate the research question. As Flaum (2002) noted, effective leadership is often learned during leadership experiences. Because of this and based on the work of several leadership scholars (Flaum, 2002; Brungardt, 1996; Bass & Bass, 2008), the researchers chose to frame this study in the inquiry paradigm of phenomenology. Phenomenology explores “how human beings make sense of experience and transform experience into consciousness” (Patton, 2002, p. 104). Population and Sample

The population for this study is undergraduate students enrolled in a personal leadership education course at Texas A&M University. One of the objectives of the course is for students to become more aware of, apply, and reflect upon personal leadership capacities. Students achieve this objective by participating in the abovementioned PGP.


55

The sample of this study consists of 90 students’ PGP reflection papers. Three different instructors during the Spring 2010 and Fall 2010 semesters contributed random samples of students’ PGP reflections (a total possible n of 229). A sample of 34 reflections came from the Spring 2010 section, 26 from one section in the Fall of 2010, and 30 from another section in the Fall of 2010. Purposeful random sampling was chosen to “to reduce bias” (Patton, 2002, p. 244) in sampling three different sections of Personal Leadership Education. Each reflection paper was given a code identifying which section (S, J, or B) it was taken from and numbered at random. Data Collection

The type of data collected should be emergent from the research design and the purpose of the research. In this phenomenological study, it was concluded that students’ reflections of their experiences in their personal growth projects would yield the most rich data. In phenomenology, reflection is retrospective, not introspective (Van Manen, 1990), so asking students to reflect on their lived experiences within the PGP assignment fulfills this retrospective reflection. As part of the PGP assignment, students were asked to reflect on their PGP experience. Students cogitated on how their chosen project effected their leadership development as well as how the PGP helped them experience models and theories covered in class. The random sample yielded 90 usable reflections. These reflections vary on length and chosen PGP.

Data Analysis

Deductive content analysis was conducted on the 90 student sample reflections. The developing self component of the Leadership Identity Development (LID) model (Komives et al., 2005) was used as the deductive lens. In order to establish inter-rater reliability, all three researchers conducted separate hand-coded content analysis. Each researcher coded the reflections into unitized data in accordance to their perception of LID application. Data units were extracted from the original sources and then categorized into core consistencies (Lincoln & Guba, 1989). The combined efforts of the researchers resulted in over 200 unitized data segments. Inter-rater reliability or the triangulation of analysis, in which “two or more persons independently analyze the same qualitative data and compare their findings” (p. 560) adds to the reliability of data analysis (Patton, 2002). Because the same procedure of unitizing data was used by all researchers, triangulation was established by comparing the data units which were assigned to the five sub-categories of the LID model. Data units, which were coded into internally homogeneous categories by the researchers, were used as a viable pool for describing the findings of the research. The narrative descriptions of the data


56

units and core consistencies provided sufficient detail to enable the reader to make adequate interpretations and transferability decisions. An audit trail including the initial hand-coded content analysis and compilation of data units into core consistencies was kept with each coded writing sample to ensure dependability and confirmability (Lincoln & Guba, 1989).

Findings This study examined the leadership identity development of students who completed a PGP in an upper-level course on personal leadership education. Specifically, the researchers examined students’ development as it relates to the Developing Self component of the LID model (Komives et al., 2005). The Developing Self component consists of five sub-categories – Deepening Self-Awareness, Building Self-Confidence, Establishing Interpersonal Efficacy, Applying New Skills, and Expanding Motivations. Deepening Self-Awareness

Eighty-five point five percent of the sample described becoming more aware of certain personal traits than they were before the personal growth project. Areas of self-awareness that were reported included realizing how they learn and solve problems, their levels of patience when tackling new and unfamiliar tasks, as well as their levels of drive and persistence in completing their projects. One student noted, “It (the project) forced me to take a long hard look internally, where I came to realize things about me that I thought were good, but also many things that I know I need to improve on.” Student B21 observed, “I normally rely on people for help with many things in life. This project made me see that I am capable of learning new things and doing tasks on my own.” Other students, such as S26, noted that “I really like learning new things” and “I learned that I excel under pressure!” Building Self-Confidence

Almost 52% of the sample described an increase in self-confidence as a result of completing their growth project. This increase in self-confidence instilled within the students a desire to continue attempting new things and move out of their comfort zone. Many students noted that this new-found confidence would encourage them to seek leadership roles and be more vocal in their organizational meetings.


57

Student S19 claimed that “My life has already changed a great deal from taking this class (Crossfit), it has truly inspired me to be better in every aspect of my life.” Another student noted, “a new confidence in me has come with it. Now I am no longer afraid to tackle new challenges that are placed in front of me.” (S21) This same sentiment is echoed by other students. “This experience has helped me realize that I should not let fear keep me from trying something new” (B22) and “In the future, if a strenuous assignment is placed before me, I know that I have the capability to go out and accomplish it.” (J4) Establishing Interpersonal Efficacy

More than 44% of the sample reported increases in their interpersonal efficacy. This lower percentage might be explained by the number of projects where students worked independently and thus did not have the opportunity to interact with others and build this skill. Those who did report gains in this area noted stronger relationships with family members and friends who shared an interest in their topic as well as new friendships that were established. “My ego has had to take a back seat while learning this skill (archery) and I am now more empathetic when others come to me for help.” (J12)

This student understood the need to identify followers who can compensate for her weaknesses as a leader. In the context of her cooking project she described the experience stating, “I see with greater clarity the need for people on my team or in my community that complement what I do well by picking up the slack where I am weak. If I am an especially salty and starch-heavy course of chicken and dumplings, then I need people with me who add sweetness like a pie or crisp, lively energy like a green salad.” (B5).

Applying New Skills

Nearly 57% of the sample reported learning new skills that could be applied in their leadership roles. The ability to listen to others was a key skill noted by students. Other leadership skills included improved problem solving and time-management skills. Continuous learning is an essential attitude for leaders. This student proclaimed, “I can take the steps I used in cake decorating and apply them to any new thing that I want to learn in the future. “ (B2) Another student stated “I have always taken the easy route in life and this project helped me to see that sometimes it is more beneficial to stray away from the safe zone in order to expand your knowledge.” (B4) Student S12 observed, “I actually saw that in different situations that I actually could see my strengths take action.”


58

Expanding Motivations

Expanding motivations is described as narrowing or focusing goals and seeking a deeper commitment to something (Komives, et al., 2005). Almost 39% of the sample noted growth in this area. Student B15 stated, “This project alone made me realize the importance of finding a career that suits my strengths and addresses my personality type. …I am determined to find a career that addresses my creativity and allows the artistic side of me to flourish.” Student S11 found a new passion in the project, “I think that this experience is going to become a pastime that I will embrace for the rest of my life.” “I realized that even knowledgeable leaders also have room to grow and learn more,” noted student J33. Student B26 noted that “in many situations, you may have all of the resources sitting right before your eyes, but be unable to put them all together. The project helped me look at those pieces and instead of just seeing pieces, I saw the big picture that those pieces, when working together, could create. As a leader, people will look at you to be that person who is able to take those pieces and create the ‘bigger picture’ that no one else can see.” Student J10 learned that leaders cannot do it alone: “I cannot do everything by myself no matter how strong I think I am at any given thing. I need a team of people around me to tell me how they were able to succeed and give me perspective when I look at something too narrowly.” (J10) The actual number of students making at least one comment for each sub-category is listed in Table 1. Additional themes emerging from the sample included:

• Their chosen project reduced stress in their lives.

• Increased levels of patience.

• Learned independence.


59

Table 1 Number and percentage of students reporting in each sub-stage of the LID Model, N=90.

LID Subcategory n* Percentage

Developing Self-Awareness 77 85.5

Building Self-Confidence 45 51.8

Establishing Interpersonal Efficacy

40 44.4

Applying New Skills 51 56.7

Expanding Motivations 35 38.9

*Note: n=number of students from the sample of 90 that exhibited growth in that trait.

Conclusions

The PGP assignment seems to be very effective in promoting the development of students’ leadership identity, especially in the “developing self” category of the Leadership Identity Model (Komives et al., 2005). Researchers found evidence of each component of Developing Self (deepening self-awareness, building self-confidence, establishing interpersonal efficacy, applying new skills, and expanding motivations) in students’ reflections. The greatest area of growth was in Developing Self-awareness. Sparrowe (2005) notes that self-awareness is a key component for developing authenticity. Continual development of self-awareness is part of the journey to students’ developing their leadership identity. Over one-half of the students gained self-confidence in their ability to complete new and challenging tasks. Kolb (1999) found that self-confidence to be a predictor for identifying emerging leaders for further training and development. Because developing relationships is critical to effective leadership, improving Interpersonal Efficacy is an important concept in developing a leadership identity. More than 50% of the students were able to see how the skills they developed in their PGP could be transferred to a leadership role. Taking concepts learned in one context, reflecting on their application in a different context, then testing those concepts in that new context perfectly describes Kolb’s Experiential Learning Model (1984). The Expanding Motivations subcategory had the fewest number of students indicating growth. The prompts for reflection in this assignment were not designed to have students reflect on this concept and could indicate the lower number of students reporting growth in this area.


60

Recommendations and Implications Having students complete a PGP assignment can be effective in helping them develop self. Developing self is important in leading others (Neck & Manz, 2007; Komives, 1998). As leadership educators, we should be concerned about how students learn leadership. Huber (2002) stated “as leadership educators, we help people to understand what it means to be a leader” (p. 31). This PGP assignment has implications for leadership educators who teach personal leadership education courses. As the research concluded, leadership educators could use this PGP assignment to help students develop self. The reflection is a critical component to this assignment. Providing students with a few questions to think about in regard to their personal growth is important in this process. This assignment gives students the opportunity to learn something new, take risks, learn outside the classroom, and do something they really enjoy. This ultimately leads to promoting “developing self” in order to grow as a leader and gain self-knowledge. Additional research is needed that focuses on other outcomes of the PGP assignment. Other possible avenues include examining the effect of the PGP on the development of emotional intelligence, as well as the development of the attitude of life-long learning. Comparing courses which use similar projects to develop personal leadership skills and knowledge would add to the validity of the study. This would also cross-validate the assignment as a viable option in personal leadership development.


61

References Bass, B. M., & Bass, R. (2008). The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory,

research, and managerial applications (4th ed.). New York: Free Press. Boyd, B. L., & Williams, J. (2010). Developing life-long learners through

personal growth projects. Journal of Leadership Education, 9(2), 144-150. Brungardt, C. (1996). The making of leaders: A review of the research in

leadership development and education. The Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(3), 81-95.

Conger, J. A. (1998). Qualitative research as the cornerstone methodology for

understanding leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 9(1), 107-121. Day, D. V., Zaccaro, S. J., & Halpin, S. M. (2004). Leader development for

transforming organizations: growing leaders for tomorrow. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Simon and Schuster. Flaum, S. A. (August 2002). Six Ps of great leadership. Executive Excellence,

19(8), 3-4. Fritz, S. M., Brown, W., Lunde, J. P, & Banset, E. A. (2004). Interpersonal skills

for leadership (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. George, B. (2007). True North. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Huber, N. (2002). Approaching leadership education in the new millennium.

Journal of Leadership Education, 1(1), 25-34. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Kolb, J. A. (1999). The effect of gender role, attitude toward leadership, and self-

confidence on leader emergence: Implications for leadership development. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 10(4), 305-320.

Komives, S. R. (1998). Exploring leadership for college students who want to

make a difference. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


62

Komives, S. R., Owen, J. E., Longerbeam, S. D., Mainella, F. C., & Osteen, L. (2005). Developing a leadership identity: A grounded theory. Journal of

College Student Development, 46(6), 593-611. Komives, S. R., Lucas, N., & McMahon, T. R. (2006). Exploring leadership:

For college students who want to make a difference. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Komives, S. R., Longerbeam, S. D., Mainella, F., Osteen, L., Owen, J. E., &

Wagner, W. (2009). Leadership identity development: Challenges in applying a developmental model. Journal of Leadership Education, 8(1), 11-47.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1990). The leadership challenge. San Francisco:

Wiley Higher Education. Lewin, K. (1958). Field theory in social sciences. New York: Harper & Row. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1989). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA:

Sage. London, M. (2009). Leadership development: Paths to self-insight and

professional growth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. London, M., & Smither, J. W. (1999). Career-related continuous learning:

Defining the construct and mapping the process. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in Human Resources Management, 17, 81-121.

McEwen, M. K. (2003). The nature and uses of theory. In S. R. Komives & D.

Woodard (Eds.). Student services: A handbook for the profession (4th ed.), pp. 53-178. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Neck, C. P., & Manz, C. C. (2007). Mastering self-leadership: Empowering

yourself for personal excellence (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Oldham, P. (2008) Leadership identity developmental influences: A case study of

African American university students. (Ed.D. dissertation). Retrieved from Proquest Dissertations & Theses database. (Publication No. AAT 3297570)

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.


63

Piaget, J. (1970). Genetic epistemology. New York: Columbia University Press. Sparrowe, R. T. (2005). Authentic leadership and the narrative self. The

Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 419-439. Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an

action sensitive pedagogy. New York: State University of New York.


64

Insights from Six Women on Their Personal

Journeys to Becoming Deans of Agriculture:

A Qualitative Study

Sarah Kleihauer

Agricultural Science Instructor Wilson Central High School

Carrie Ann Stephens

Associate Professor University of Tennessee

Knoxville, TN

William E. Hart

Associate Professor University of Tennessee

Knoxville, TN

Abstract

Understanding one’s personal journey provides for effective learning, growth, and development (Madsen, 2010). Reflection on the influences and experiences of successful women leaders is essential to understanding the factors that have enabled them to obtain and sustain leadership positions in nontraditional career fields. The purpose of this qualitative study was to conceptualize and describe the personal journeys of women who became deans of agriculture. The central research question was, “Describe your personal journey to becoming a dean of agriculture?” Six women deans of agriculture were interviewed and observed in an attempt to recognize the impact their personal journeys have had in developing their leadership styles and sustaining their leadership role. Conclusions were (a) they were first born children, (b) influenced by parental qualities and spousal support, and (c) mentors recognized their gifts and talents and encouraged them to pursue advanced degrees and leadership positions.

Introduction and Theoretical Framework Understanding one’s own personal journey provides for effective learning, growth, and development of self (Madsen, 2010). Reflection on the influences and experiences of successful women leaders is essential to understanding the factors


65

that have enabled them to obtain and sustain leadership positions in nontraditional career fields. Bennis (1989) believed that in order for one to pass on their insight and perceptions of their experiences, they must fully understand and recognize the true value of the experience. He noted:

There are lessons in everything, and if you are fully deployed, you will learn most of them. Experiences are not truly yours until you think about them, analyze them, examine them, question them, reflect on them, and finally understand them. The point, once again, is to use your experiences rather than being used by them, to be the designer, not the design, so that experiences empower rather than imprison. (p. 98)

If one is to examine the true value of her experiences, a women’s development and journey (e.g., culture, traditions, religion, values, backgrounds, education, work-family issues, self-concept, gender barriers, expectations, previous opportunities, perceived future opportunities) must be reflected upon and understood (Madsen, 2007). Madsen suggested that “understanding the influences, backgrounds, and career paths of women who have succeeded in obtaining and maintaining powerful positions of influence within higher education is essential in deepening and broadening our understanding of leadership development as a whole within higher education” (p. 184). Therefore, to understand this phenomenon, one must begin with exploring her childhood which is in essence the beginning of her journey. Hennig and Jardim (1977) recognized childhood as being a significant period in an individual’s development. Cooke (2004) agreed childhood relationships, developmental activities, and experiences (including hardships and times of pain) come together to create each human being. Sulloway (1996) maintained that “childhood and the family are central to the story of human behavior because they provide the immediate casual context for these developmental scenarios” (p. 118). Furthermore, “a person’s inner sense of authority will be developed during childhood in the system of family relations, when the parents express their expectations, ideas, and emotions to their child” (Lorenzen, 1996, p. 26). Parental interactions and expectations, however, differ according to the child’s birth order. According to Ernst and Angst (1983), first born children experience more parental involvement, specifically verbal stimulation and strict parenting, than later born children. Falbo (1981) argued that a combination of positive parental attention and high parental expectations lead first born children to setting higher standards for themselves. As a result, first born children developed higher education aspirations and a higher degree of achievement motivation than later born children. Additionally, first born children share a closer relationship with


66

their parents and thus compare themselves to their parents whereas last born children compare themselves to their older siblings. In addition to birth order, relationships within the immediate family circle are central to the effective development of an individual’s feelings of success, competence, and confidence (Falbo, 1981; Hartman, 1999; Wells, 1998). Furthermore, women in nontraditional occupations have parents who are highly supportive of their daughter’s career interests (Auster & Auster, 1981). In addition, successful women leaders are primarily raised in homes that are occupied by two parents (Hennig & Jardim, 1977; Keown & Keown, 1982; Woo, 1985) who have contributed to their daughters’ development, resulting in the enhancement of each woman’s confidence, knowledge, and skills important for leadership (Madsen, 2007). In addition to parental support, achievements and behavior of parents greatly influence the motivation and values of women (Madsen, 2007). Madsen determined the strong educational background and community commitment of mothers provided a powerful model for women. While most of the women saw their mothers as “loving, committed, and dedicated,” almost all of them also saw their mothers as “influential, competent, strong, intelligent, and fun” (Madsen, 2007, p. 577). Similarly, Matz (2002) found that a mother’s impact on their daughter’s self-esteem and inspiration was greater than the father’s. In contrast, women emphasized characteristics such as respect, strength, high expectations, and protection when describing their fathers (Madsen, 2006). For the most part, the fathers considered it important to “teach their daughters, as well as provide encouragement, opportunities, and education for them to become self-sufficient” (Madsen, 2006, p. 577). Hennig and Jardim (1977) and Astin and Leland (1991) also reported fathers had a stronger influence on the development, aspirations, and educational goals of their daughters. Hennig and Jardim (1977) noted that women were “taught, encouraged and supported by fathers, who expected them to aspire to and prepare for a career” (p. 118). Overall, women believe both parents are influential but that mothers have a stronger influence (Madsen, 2006). The importance of parental relationships and influence to the development of women leaders is well documented (Astin & Leland, 1991; Cubillo & Brown, 2003; Hennig & Jardim, 1977; Madsen, 2007). In Madsen’s (2007) study of university presidents, when asked to speak about the individuals who influenced them through their adolescent and college years, most mentioned their parents’ “encouragement to learn, be educated, use their minds, and aspire for college” (p. 10). Parents and family, along with faculty members, academic leaders, friends and peers, and other mentors help to establish a supportive and challenging


67

environment, both personally and academically, which is important for the career success of women (Hennig & Jardim, 1977). Madsen (2007) reported “all of the women had authority figures who saw their gifts and talents and demanded quality and rigor” (p. 10). Van Velsor and Hughes (1990) and Wells (1998) determined that women have a remarkable capacity to learn from relationships and connections with others. Wells (1998) further noted women’s self-images were not only founded in relationships they formed with others, but were also shaped by reinforcement and rewards of respected individuals. Good friends and peers are also excellent mentors to women as they progress in their careers (Madsen, 2007). These individuals acted as “sounding boards” (p. 113) and provided open and honest feedback, which was critical in gaining personal insight and strength. Despite the support of family and mentors, however, women who pursue their career and leadership aspirations are confronted with choosing between family and career. McDonald (2004) argued the greatest challenge to women entrepreneurs is the difficulty of juggling a growing company and growing family. In Matz’s (2002) study of women leaders, however, over 62% of the women sampled were married and almost 80 percent had children. Additionally, Matz found that over half of the women leaders felt their career never or only occasionally interfered with their personal lives. The women’s success in keeping family and career separate may be explained by their spouses’ willingness to share household labor and childcare. This domestic support had allowed these women to take on leadership positions in their careers while maintaining a household. In a study of women administrators, Woo (1985) noted that women attributed their success to immense determination to have careers and the encouragement and support they received from their families. The majority of the women believed “their husbands’ support had been a crucial factor in their careers” (Woo, 1985, p. 287). Without that support, each woman believed she would have sacrificed her work before disbanding the marriage. Woo (1985) related women’s need for encouragement and assistance to men in leadership roles who also rely heavily on their spouses for support. Indeed, the success of women and men in leadership roles is greatly influenced by the commitment of their spouses and families to their careers. The effectiveness of an individual in a leadership role is also impacted by the style with which the individual leads; any difference is generally perceived as a product of gender and ultimately affects people’s views of who should advance to a leadership position (Eagly & Carli, 2004). As more women have begun occupying positions of leadership, numerous studies have been conducted to


68

determine whether or not there are distinct differences in female and male leadership styles. Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt, and van Engen (2003) confirmed that women’s typical leadership styles are more transformational than those of men. Female leaders are more focused on mentoring and empowering their followers to help develop their full potential and thus contribute more effectively to the organization (Eagly & Carli, 2004). Conversely, male leaders appear to be more prone to exhibiting aspects of transactional leadership. This leadership style resembles traditional management practices, which consists of assigning a subordinate responsibility, rewarding them for meeting objectives, and correcting them for failing to meet objectives. Most managerial experts advocate the more feminine and androgynous skills of negotiation, cooperation, diplomacy, team building, and inspiring and nurturing others rather than distinctively masculine traits and skills. These feminine qualities parallel those that depict transformational leadership and are thus perceived as necessary attributes of effective leaders. In examining a woman’s journey to establish a leadership position, many factors seem to be common: strong family upbringing, excellent mentoring and spousal support. In a male-dominated field, such as agriculture, the question becomes do women have the same successful experiences? It is important to note that from our nation’s earliest days, agriculture has held a crucial place in the American economy and culture. Today, the United States is looking to agricultural institutions for solutions to growing global concerns regarding economic uncertainty; natural resource and environmental issues; food security and sustainable agricultural practices; increasing foreign competition; and decreasing consumer understanding. While there are many complex factors that influence economic conditions and consumer awareness, it is clear that education in agriculture plays an important role in preparing farmers, researchers, educators, extension staff, members of agri-businesses, and others to make productive contributions (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 1998). As a result, visionary and competent individuals are needed to drive higher education institutions to new levels of excellence and innovation and direct the future of the agricultural industry and our nation. However, Rubin (2004) argued that the development, attraction, and retention of extraordinary leaders are one of eight fundamental challenges facing higher education today. Despite this documented concern about the preparation and retention of future educational leaders, there is little published research on the development of individuals who acquire leadership positions, such as college women deans. The role and leadership abilities of college deans are of particular importance in higher education because of the influence these leaders have on the direction and


69

management of their institutions as well as the relationships they create and maintain with government officials, industry and community leaders, and their own faculty, staff, and students. Therefore, this article explored birth order, family influences, mentor experiences, and the spousal support system as each affected the leadership development and leadership success of woman deans.

Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this qualitative study was to conceptualize and describe the personal journeys of women on their road to becoming deans of agriculture. The central research question addressed during the study was, “Describe your personal journey to becoming a dean of agriculture?” Each participant was asked probing or follow-up questions in an effort to indirectly guide their responses to provide the sought after information. Interview questions included (a) describe your family upbringing, (b) describe your immediate family, and (c) tell me about your road to becoming a dean of agriculture.

Methods and Procedures In order to fully comprehend the experiences participants shared, the study was performed using the qualitative research method, which provided for a “complex, detailed understanding of the issue” (Creswell, 2007, p. 40). Gathering information from interviews, observations, documents, and pictures provided the researcher with a bank of data from which themes could be created, interpretations made, and a “rich, full picture of a research situation” painted (Wright, 2002/3, p. 8). A phenomenological approach was utilized in an attempt to gain entry into the conceptual world of study participants in order to understand how and what meaning they construct from their lived experiences (Bogden & Biklen, 2007). Phenomenology allowed for the accurate interpretation and description of the meaning of the six women deans’ experiences in sustaining their leadership roles in a predominantly male field. The population for this study consisted of six women deans of agriculture in Land-Grant Institutions. Twenty-five women deans and associate deans were identified as possible study participants using the 2009 Directory of Deans and Directors of Academic Programs in Schools and Colleges of Agriculture (Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, 2009). While the researchers initially sought to engage women deans from each region of the Continental United States, women associate deans were asked to participate in regions where women deans were not accessible in an effort to maintain a representative sample of women who have all experienced the phenomenon of sustaining their leadership roles in a male-dominated field. Each dean was assigned a pseudonym


70

to protect their identity and ensure the confidentiality of their statements. Heather and Kelly were interviewed from the northern region; in the southern region, Maggie was interviewed; Rachel and Laura were interviewed from the eastern region; and in the western region, Shelley was interviewed.

Gaining Entry

An Institutional Review Board Form B was completed and approval received by the University of Tennessee Research Compliance Services on April 27, 2009 to conduct the research. Each perspective participant was contacted by phone and email to secure authorization to participate in the study. Prior to conducting the interviews with each individual, an informed consent letter was signed and collected at the interview.

Data Collection

The methods employed to collect data in this study included one to two hour in-depth interviews. The researcher’s presence as a participant observer in the environments of each of the six women deans for two days was also utilized. During each field visit, the researcher recorded descriptive and reflective notes as she observed events and interactions in each dean’s daily routine; which included meetings, workshops, classes, time with family at home. This enabled the researcher to gain an accurate account of the field as well as maintain the subjectivity of her understanding of each dean’s experience. In addition, each dean participated in an audio-taped, semi-structured interview in which the researcher asked open-ended, non-leading questions (Creswell, 2007). The interviews focused on revealing the influences and experiences which helped to develop each woman. The interview protocol asked each participant to describe her family upbringing, her immediate family, and her road to becoming a dean of agriculture.

Data Analysis

The in-depth interviews were transcribed and analyzed along with the researcher’s field notes. The data was examined using several methods, which included identifying significant statements and elements of meaning; creating textural and structural descriptions; and recognizing descriptions which revealed commonalities among the participants’ experiences (Creswell, 2007). Emerging themes from all data were coded and sorted into specific categories by the researcher.


71

Validation Strategies

Prior to launching the study, the researcher reflected on qualities she possessed which may impact her relationship with the environment and people in the study. First, the researcher holds a strong passion for agriculture as she grew up on a farm and is pursuing a degree in agriculture. The researcher’s strong interest in this field may result in more focus on the selected women’s impact in agriculture and how they have achieved their current status. Next, the researcher is female and possesses moderate feminist beliefs. She takes special interest in the stories of women who have overcome challenges in fields subjugated by males. This may influence the interview questions asked of participants pertaining to how they have achieved and sustained leadership positions in agriculture, a predominantly male field. Finally, the researcher has developed leadership characteristics and independence that have enabled her to take on a variety of leadership roles. Prior to commencing the study, the researcher believed women deans were independent and have assumed many leadership roles throughout their lives. In an effort to keep a neutral viewpoint, the researcher reflected on her biases of the research topic and assumptions of the outcomes of the study prior to and during the research to maintain as impartial of a position as possible. The researcher personally reflected on each occasion of contact and communication with the participants. The researcher also structured the research question and probing questions in such a way that did not lead or guide the participant’s responses in a predetermined direction. In addition to the researcher’s efforts to reduce the impact of bias on the data collected, several validation strategies were employed to document the “accuracy” and value of this phenomenological research study. Prolonged engagement in the field and the triangulation of data sources, methods, and investigators were techniques used to establish credibility (Creswell, 2007). From the researcher’s observations, a thick description of each participant and their environment was constructed to help readers determine the transferability of the research. Dependability of the study was established through peer review by another researcher trained in qualitative analysis throughout the research process. Additionally, member checks of data, analyses, interpretations, and conclusions were conducted to confirm credibility of the study.

Findings The results section is divided into four subsections: (a) birth order, (b) family influences, (c) mentor experiences, and (d) spousal support systems.


72

Birth Order

Five of the six women deans in this study were first born children. The sixth dean was not the chronologically first born child, but was raised as the first born due to special circumstances. Being the first born child provides opportunities that younger siblings do not experience such as being a caretaker, taking on supervisory responsibilities and learning how to provide leadership at a young age. As stated by one of the deans:

Being the oldest, you become a parent of sorts. You take on care responsibilities, supervisory responsibilities, and …I think you’re just looked to fill in when your parents are not around. When mother and dad were out doing farm chores, I would watch after them. I think that you’re just looked to sort of step up and fill in for the parents and many times I think that that’s probably a role that older children take.

In addition to taking on supervisory responsibilities and leadership roles, first born children also assume parental duties, as note participant stated:

My father was killed when I was a freshman, so I think that there’s another leadership role I sort of took on to help mother a little bit. You’re the oldest and you’re the most mature adult anyway that she could talk to so I just think that older siblings normally have a different kind of expectation and role than younger children do.

First born children are also subject to strict parental rules and high expectations. As one dean stated:

My father was the authoritarian, and he was the one that set the bar high, very demanding, and pushed….he was always one that if I got an A- I’d be saying, ‘yeah!’ and he’d be saying, ‘Why isn’t it an A?’”

Family Influence

Mothers and fathers of these women played a significant role in their accomplishment of becoming deans of agriculture. In general, the mothers were identified as the caregivers and the fathers were the authoritarians of the household. As expressed by one of the women deans, caregivers and authoritarians holistically develop individuals:

It was a team, it wasn’t like they were working against one another, it was always that… my dad showed love in a very different way. I can remember getting upset sometimes and crying about something that happened and he would say ‘Okay, that’s enough, just suck it up and lets


73

go.’ And my mom would say, ‘Oh, honey, I understand,’ and pat me on the back. I needed both of these. I needed to hear ‘Suck it up and move on,’ but I also needed somebody to give me a hug and say, ‘I understand.’ They worked great as a team and so I’m really thankful for that.

While mothers were generally perceived as caregivers and fathers as authoritarians, each dean had a unique way of describing parents. Therefore, Table 1 and 2 contain descriptive words used by deans of agriculture about their mothers and fathers. Table 1 Descriptive Words Used by Deans of Agriculture about their Mothers

My Mother was/is…

Homemaker Strong Adventurous Educated Determined Brave Independent Stubborn Generous Quiet Traditional Not supportive of career Bookish Hospitable Nurturing Practical Completely dependent Disciplinarian Nuts and Bolts Housewife Strong personality Decision maker Feminist Creative Inspiring Extremely involved Organized

Table 2 Descriptive Words Used by Deans of Agriculture about their Fathers

My Father was/is…

Educated Intellectual Motivated Quiet Analytical Unconventional Bookish Good Wild Intelligent Sense of Service Creative Theoretical Non-emotional Survivor Cerebral Not accessible Authoritarian Smart Environmentalist Demanding Prideful Humorous Handy Driven Strong Respectful of Education Supportive of daughter’s education

As described in Table 1 and 2, the qualities of both the mothers and fathers strongly influenced the women deans’ personalities. Specific characteristics that were common among all of the deans’ mothers were homemaker, educated, extremely involved, and nurturing; and, specific characteristics that were common


74

among the fathers were educated, driven, supportive of daughter’s education, authoritarian, and demanding. The women deans largely attribute their self-assurance and motivation in their advancement to leadership to the support that both parents provided them growing up:

I think that having the support from my family to do whatever I wanted was really very important…When I look back across my career, a lot of the things that I accomplished, you know it wasn’t that I was especially brave; I just didn’t even acknowledge what the obstacles were. And you know… I just walked around obstacles because it didn’t dominate my psyche and I think a lot of that was because of the supportive environment that I came up in at home.

Mentor Influence

While the deans’ parents played a role in their development as an individual, their professional advancement was mainly influenced by their mentors. Although not all of the mentorship experience was positive, all of the women deans advanced out of malice for or encouragement from their mentors:

I didn’t have good mentors at all. I was told verbally, “Ah, don’t worry about research, it’s not even important.” That’s what my old department head told me. Because he was just thinking totally of education, education, education …and there’s a bigger pond out there than education. But see, I was so naive… I was so used to outreach, outreach, outreach, service, service, service. Well, that’s not really right; you need to have some scholarship. So, I didn’t get that message. And when I went up for full professor, our new chancellor said ‘Oh no, this person has not had enough scholarship’ and I was denied the promotion to full professor.

While negative mentoring or lack of mentoring affected some of the women deans, others experienced positive mentoring which shaped the advancement and success of their selected profession. As one dean explained:

My major advisor encouraged me to go on for a Ph.D. And I hadn’t really thought about it. He said, ‘Hey, you can do this, you can do this, you’d enjoy it, you’d be good at it.’ And he started giving me some leads of people that I might work with at other universities and I wound up working with the fella who had served as my advisor’s advisor…it’s the people who encourage you and, like my decision to go on for a Ph.D. program, it wasn’t going to happen, but somebody sat down and said hey, you need to do that, and that’s all it took.


75

Spousal Support

The women in this study attribute their success as deans of agriculture to not only the positive influences of family members and mentors, but also the immense support they have received from their spouses. The deans’ husbands have non-academic professions which enable them to carry out household duties and support these women in their leadership role. As one dean revealed:

I don’t clean the house, I rarely cook, although I’m perfectly capable of it. A lot of times I leave the house at 7:00 a.m. in the morning and don’t come back till 8:30 at night, so I’m not going to prepare dinner at 8:30 at night, so he has to do a lot of those things.” These women realize that their husbands’ career sacrifices have been essential to their advancement in academia. “I think having a really supportive husband and a husband who is portable in his career is hugely positive.” Furthermore, another dean described her husband’s sacrifice as assuming the role of a stay-at-home dad. “My husband is a very introspective person, a very artsy kind of thinker, creative, a very good writer, and published in terms of poetry and literature. He didn’t work, so he was home with the kids. He is just a big kid himself, loves life, loves doing things and having fun. When I was out of town, they would make pancakes and he would flip them up in the air and they would catch them on their plates and I’d find out when I came home that the spot on the ceiling was from a pancake hitting the ceiling when they were tossing it across the room.”

In addition to their complimenting professions, the husbands’ accommodating personalities are compatible with the driven personalities of their spouses.

We’re really strong partners, really strong partners. He is protective of me, he’s supportive of me, he doesn’t serve as much of a critic in a sense, but he is always kind of my touch stone for what’s a good idea, what’s not a good idea. He’s a critical asset for me. And…it’s interesting, he has no college background, he has just a very little bit of college, and has worked in the trade his whole life. That kind of very practical, real, tangible relationship to the world is actually in some respects very similar to what I do. I do a lot of building too….and it isn’t necessarily with nails, but its building and he builds. And he’s built a fabulous business on a business. We bring very similar kinds of values about the way we do business, a real commitment to integrity and quality work. Very frequently, people think dual career couples are two academics…we’re not that way. And I think it’s been a wonderful balance for the intensity of my life. And the degree to which academic communities tend to get fairly self-absorbed, often focused on some fairly small things, he’s always a check on that. The


76

politics and who’s more important than who or who’s being recognized. It’s not very interesting to him…and that’s helpful for me in terms of keeping my bearings.

Conclusions Each of these women were essentially first born children which led them to develop a higher degree of achievement motivation, become linear thinkers, and establish higher expectations of themselves (Falbo, 1981). As one dean commented about her dad’s high expectations as motivation to do better, she described herself as having a “linear and A-type personality.” First born children also possess a stronger predisposition to leadership than later born children (Adler, 1970). In addition to being first born children, the influence of parental qualities has also impacted their success as women deans of agriculture. In a study of women university presidents, Madsen (2007) found that the mothers provided a positive role model for their daughters through strong educational backgrounds and community commitment. The women presidents described their mothers as loving, committed, and dedicated as well as influential, competent, strong, intelligent, and fun. Similarly, maternal qualities such as being a homemaker, educated, extremely involved, and nurturing were identified in this study and provided the deans with an internal drive to be fully engaged in their institutions. For example, these women have a sense of urgency to keep faculty, student, and community relations personable. As noted:

I keep in very close touch with a lot of students. They’ve gone on to really exciting lives and are contributing in a whole host of ways. And they still keep in touch which is really meaningful for me now that I’m in a dean role…because they still ask for advice and I still get to…track their lives and their contributions, both professional and I get to watch their personal lives. I get pictures of their kids and their new houses and…stay connected to them through the jobs they’re taking and what they’re trying to do. It’s about passion, and it’s about making a difference in the lives of students. If I took the piece away to make a difference in the lives of students from my life…my life would not be nearly as fulfilled in terms of my professional career.

Furthermore, the women presidents in Madsen’s (2007) study associated characteristics such as respect, strength, high expectations, and protection with their fathers. Moreover, paternal qualities such as being educated, driven, supportive of daughter’s education, authoritarian, and demanding motivated these women deans to achieve higher expectations of themselves, as well as expect more from faculty and students. As one dean stated:


77

Every job I’ve ever taken, that’s been my measure…is this the kind of job that I could spend the rest of my career doing and feel rewarded and feel like I’m making a difference and feel like I can contribute in very meaningful ways? I never want to take a job where I feel like I’m taking more than I’m giving, I never want to take a job where I don’t have that passion for what I do, and I never want to take a job that I don’t think I’m adequately prepared for. It’s always going to be a stretch, you always have to take a stretch, you always have to take that next step, but you know inside whether you have the tools, if it’s the right time for that step.

The influences of parental attributes combined with growing up during the baby boom era helped to shape and influence the development of the women deans. While the women of their mothers’ generation tended to marry early and leave the workforce to raise their children and tend to household duties, their daughters achieved higher academic aspirations and pursued non-traditional career fields for women (Albers, 1999). The deans in this study obtained degrees in agricultural and extension education, agricultural engineering, animal science, biology, horticulture, and entomology. They married later than their mothers and continued working after having children (Albers, 1999). It also became more acceptable for women to contribute to the household financially and pursue professional careers, enabling them to achieve their independence. One dean described the landscape for women during this transitional time:

Now, during that period of time, there were very few females that sort of branched out of their sort of pre-determined career fields at the time, and so for a female to be in agriculture was really not an option. I don’t know that there were any here to be honest with you… you live in the sort of social expectations and so that was just sort of the first group of more females entering into college…working outside the home. More and more women were working outside the home and taking on professional careers, so I was just sort of on that edge, that cutting edge of that transition period.

As compared to Madsen’s (2007) study, these women deans of agriculture had mentors who recognized their gifts and talents. In addition, they also encouraged them to pursue advanced degrees and leadership positions. While some of the mentors were faculty, other mentors were involved in the women’s lives outside of academics. A participant stated:

I’ve been very fortunate, had great mentors, my dad introduced me to a life mentor. He was in the livestock industry and had no children. He was a hard driver, and pushed people…I worked for him and he became a life


78

long friend. He was just super and really, really encouraged me outside of my family because you’re family’s supposed to say good things and your family’s supposed to encourage you, but to have somebody like that outside… He became a mentor for me when I was 9 years old and he was a mentor until he died when I was 47. He was just a champion of people and I love him and a little piece of him is always inside of me. But that’s what good mentors do and that’s what I want to do for others, whether it’s students or my staff or early career faculty, I want them to look back someday and say, “A little piece of _______ is here,” and that’s what it’s about, it’s making a difference in the lives of others.

The women deans in this study relied heavily on the support and sacrifices of their spouses. Woo’s (1985) research supports the notion that spousal support is crucial to women’s career advancement. Similarly, in this study, the deans’ husbands facilitated the women’s success by taking on the day to day activities of the home and children so they could focus on their careers. In addition, spousal commitment and professional sacrifices of the deans’ husbands provided opportunities for these women to pursue a leadership role in academia. Furthermore, the personalities of the deans’ husbands were another contributing factor to the deans’ success. The husbands assumed the role of the listener and provided an outlet for work-related frustrations of the women.

Implications This paper offers important implications for young women in pursuit of leadership roles in academia. Women with the desire to pursue leadership need to identify a positive role model and/or mentor to encourage and foster growth in the academia profession. Without the advice, knowledge, and encouragement of a mentor, leadership advancement in academia is difficult. Furthermore, women wanting to pursue leadership roles in academia should examine spousal and family support in pursuit of their leadership goals. While both spouses may be successful in academic leadership roles, this study has shown that women who pursue leadership roles in academia acknowledge they have supportive husbands who are willing to manage the daily household activities.

Recommendations and Future Research Questions Based on this study, several research questions have surfaced particularly related to the husbands’ perceptions of their spouses’ leadership role. Three questions the researchers feel should be explored are (a) How have husbands of women deans been impacted by the success of their wives pursuing a leadership role in academia? (b) How have husbands of women deans perceived their role as non-


79

alpha males? and (c) How has the family been impacted by the role of their spouse or mother? In addition to exploring the husbands’ perceptions, a follow-up study should be conducted in five years with these six women deans to (a) identify their leadership advancement if applicable, (b) determine if mentorship is still a viable component of their leadership sustainability, and (c) determine whether spousal support remains an integral part of their success as a leader.


80

References

Adler, A. (1970). The education of children (1930). Chicago: Regnery. Albers, C. (1999). Sociology of families: Readings. Thousand Oaks, California:

Pine Forge Press. Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (2009). Dean and directors of

academic programs in schools and colleges of agriculture, agriculture

and life sciences, or agriculture and natural resources. Retrieved from www.aplu.org/NetCommunity/Document.Doc?id=1645

Astin, H. S., & Leland, C. (1991). Women of influence, women of vision. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Auster, C., & Auster, D. (1981). Factors influencing women's choice of

nontraditional careers: The role of family, peers, and counselors. Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 29(3), 253-263.

Bennis, W. (1989). On becoming a leader. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley

Publishing Company. Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An

introduction to theories and methods. Boston: Pearson Education. Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among the

five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Cooke, L. H. (2004). Finding the self who leads: From one woman’s perspective.

Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The University of North Carolina, Greensboro.

Cubillo, L., & Brown, M. (2003). Women into educational leadership and

management: international differences? Journal of Educational

Administration, 41(3), 278-291. Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2004). Women and Men as Leaders. In J. Antonakis,

A. T. Cianciolo, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The nature of leadership, (pp. 279-301). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & van Engen, M. (2003).

Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: A


81

meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin, 95,

569-591. Ernst, C., & Angst, J. (1983). Birth order: Its influence on personality. Berlin:

Springer Veriag. Falbo, T. (1981). Relationships between birth category, achievement, and

interpersonal orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(1), 121-131.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (1998). Issues in urban

agriculture. Spotlight magazine. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org. Hartman, M. S. (Ed.) (1999). Talking leadership: Conversations with powerful

women. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. Hennig, M., & Jardim, A. (1977). The managerial woman. Garden City, NY:

Anchor Press/Doubleday. Keown, C. F., & Keown, A. L. (1982). Success factors for corporate woman

executives. Group & Organizational Studies, 7(4), 445-456. Lorenzen, Z. (1996). Female leadership: Some personal and professional

reflections. Leadership & Organization Development Journal. Copenhagen, Denmark: MCB University Press, 17(6), 24-31.

Madsen, S. R. (2010). Chinese Women Administrators in Higher Education:

Developing Leadership Throughout Life. Academic Leadership Online

Journal, 8(2), 1-9. Madsen, S. R. (2007). Women university presidents: Career paths and educational

backgrounds. Academic Leadership Online Journal, 5(1), 1-3. Madsen, S. R. (2006). Learning to Lead in Higher Education: Insights into the

Family Backgrounds of Women University Presidents. The Journal of

Women in Educational Leadership, 5(3), 183-200. Matz, S. I. (2002). Women leaders: Their styles, confidence, and influences. The

Claremont Graduate University. Unpublished Dissertation. McDonald, I. (2004). Women in management: an historical perspective.

Employee Relations, 26(3), 307-319.


82

Rubin, B. D. (2004). Pursuing excellence in higher education: Eight fundamental

challenges. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Sulloway, F. J. (1996). Born to rebel. New York: Parthenon Books. Van Velsor, E., & Hughes, M. W. (1990). Gender differences in the development

of managers: How women managers learn from experience. Center for Creative Leadership, Greensboro, NC. ED 334511.

Wells, S. J. (1998). Women entrepreneurs: Developing leadership for success.

New York: Garland Publishing. Woo, L. C. (1985). Women administrators: Profiles of success. The Phi Delta

Kappan, 67(4), 285-288. Wright, H. K. (2002/3). Qualitative research in education: From an attractive

nuisance to a dizzying array of traditions and possibilities. In Tennessee

Education 32 (2)/33(1), pp. 7-15.


83

Author Biographies Sarah Kleihauer graduated from the University of Tennessee, Knoxville with a Master’s of Science in Agricultural and Extension Education. Sarah is currently teaching agricultural education at Wilson Central High School in Lebanon, Tennessee. Sarah is actively involved in the FFA and the Tennessee Association of Agricultural Educators. Carrie Stephens is an Associate Professor in the Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communications Department at the University of Tennessee. She is active in the Association of Leadership Educators, American Association of Agricultural Educators, Tennessee Association of Agricultural Educators, and American Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development. She actively serves in leadership roles in the Knoxville community. Carrie has published articles in the Journal of Leadership Education, Journal of Agricultural

Education, North American Colleges and Teachers Association Journal, and co-authored a book chapter. Carrie enjoys teaching and conducting research in the areas of teaching, learning, and supervisory leadership. William E. Hart is an Associate Professor in the Biosystems Engineering and Soil Science Department at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. He is active member of the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. He has published articles primarily in ASABE Journals, Applied Engineering in

Agriculture and Transactions of the ASABE. He teaches courses in the Biosystems Engineering Technology curriculum and his areas of research include machinery systems, agricultural chemical application technology, and precision agriculture.


84

Adolescent Involvement in Extracurricular Activities:

Influences on Leadership Skills

Donna Hancock

Ph.D. Student Department of Child and Family Development

123 Dawson Hall University of Georgia

Athens, GA [email protected]

Patricia Hyjer Dyk, Ph.D.

Director of the Center for Leadership Development and Associate Professor Department of Community and Leadership Development

University of Kentucky Lexington, KY [email protected]

Kenneth Jones, Ph.D.

Associate Professor Department of Community and Leadership Development

University of Kentucky Lexington, KY

[email protected]

Abstract Study examined adolescents’ participation in sports, school, and community extracurricular activities to assess the influence of different involvement roles and adult support on leadership skills. The study found that males and females who perceived their adult support more positively had more positive perceptions of their leadership skills. Findings suggest adolescents’ perceptions towards their leadership skills are influenced by extracurricular activity involvement roles and the support of their parents and other adults. The findings contribute to future school and community based prevention and intervention programs, suggesting the importance of adolescent leadership involvement at all grade levels and the influence of adult support on adolescents’ perception toward their leadership skills. Educators should consider facilitating youth leadership through extracurricular activities involving younger high school students. This affords the opportunity for youth to develop critical skills early and put into practice what


85

they learned. We strongly encourage adult involvement in extracurricular activities.

Introduction Since leadership has been described as a set of skills and attitudes that can be learned and practiced (van Linden & Fertman, 1998), it is not surprising that adolescence is a critical time for leadership development. Through structured in-school and out-of-school clubs, sports, and community service activities these young people are exploring their strengths and learning how they can make a difference. Adolescents who participated in the greatest variety of activities reported having more leadership opportunities (Gambone & Arbreton, 1997) and greater voice in the decision making processes that affect their lives (van Linden & Fertman, 1998).

Review of the Literature Approximately 83% of adolescents ages 12-17 participate in at least one extracurricular activity (Moore, Hatcher, Vandivere, & Brown, 2000). Adolescents often develop their skills and self competencies through participation in extracurricular activities (Eccles & Gootman, 2002; Mahoney & Stattin, 2006). Positive developmental experiences that occurred in extracurricular activities predicted a more positive general self-worth and social and academic self-concept (Bloomfield & Barber, 2011). This participation has been associated with increased school engagement, self-concept, and academic achievement (Fredricks & Eccles, 2006) and less opportunities for time to be spent in unsupervised risky activities (Eccles & Barber, 1999; Mahoney & Stattin, 2000). These associations have been found to be stronger when youth are involved in a variety of activities and have opportunities to assume leadership roles (Eccles & Templeton, 2002). However, it is evident that participation in multiple types of activities (e.g., band, sports) has been associated with additional beneficial outcomes for adolescents in structured settings where adults are present and supportive (Eccles & Barber, 1999; Fredricks & Eccles, 2006; Larson & Verma, 1999). Adult Support

Leadership and leaders involve social processes; therefore, the interaction between adults and adolescents in extracurricular activities is important (Van Linden & Fertman, 1998). The theory of social learning posits that young people are heavily influenced by their social relationships and interactions with others. In particular, parents and other adults are important in the socialization process and influence attitudes and behaviors that are learned and acquired by adolescents


86

(Bandura, 1977). Specifically, Van Linden and Fertman (1998) suggest that as facilitators of leadership development, adults should work with adolescents to help them understand themselves, communicate more effectively, improve interpersonal skills, manage their time and work with groups. In extracurricular activities, partnerships with supportive adults and sustained relationships with caring adults are more likely to be available to adolescents (Benson & Pittman, 2001). Social relationships adolescents establish with adults are important because they have protective effects. For instance, adult and youth partnerships enhance adolescent engagement levels in school and prevent school dropout (Mahoney & Stattin, 2000). Furthermore, adolescents who participate in extracurricular activities have greater opportunities to build their leadership skills through positive, active, and constant support from adults in a mentoring culture (Van Linden & Fertman, 1998). Adults who are intentional about helping adolescents succeed can serve as more effective role models, mentors, and motivators (Englund, Egeland, & Collins, 2008). However, in one study two out of every three adolescents reported not having positive family communication or a caring school (Scales & Leffert, 1999). Parental support, defined as parent involvement in school, has been associated with higher school engagement, higher self-esteem, greater self-concept, and self-worth in adolescents (Scales et al., 1999). Adolescents who participate in multiple extracurricular activities in school and community settings have been found to have greater access to larger social networks (Benson, 2006; Fredricks et al., 2006). One study found that youth who participated in a leadership development program within a community-based context had more positive perceptions of their relationships with adults (Jones, 2009). Adolescent Involvement

Involvement in extracurricular activities has been associated with a number of adolescent outcomes. For instance, adolescents involved in school and community based civic activities reported more religiosity, academic engagement, and positive perceptions of parents and peers than uninvolved youth (Ludden, 2011). More specifically, when the types of activities were considered, research found that adolescents who participated in band, orchestra, chorus, or in a school play or musical were significantly less likely than non-participants to engage in problem behaviors such as alcohol consumption or drug use (Zill et al., 1995). In another study, organized activity participation was associated with higher than expected grades, school value, self-esteem, resiliency, and prosocial peers, though the pattern of findings differed by activity context (Fredricks & Eccles, 2008). Different types of extracurricular activities provide distinct patterns of experiences. Previous research suggests that involvement in sport activities has positive (e.g., self esteem) and negative effects (e.g., higher alcohol use) on


87

adolescents (Eccles & Barber, 1999). More specifically, in another study, researchers found that those who participated only in sports had more positive outcomes compared with those who had little or no involvement in organized activities, but less positive outcomes compared with those who participated in sports plus other activities (Linver, Roth, & Brooks-Gunn, 2009). When gender was considered, sports involvement has been found to impact males and females differently. For example, males who were participants in sports reported higher rates of alcohol consumption (Eccles et al., 1999; Fredricks & Eccles, 2005); although in another research study, female participants in sports had more friendships with higher achieving students (Crosnoe, 2001).

In addition to the type of activity adolescents are involved in, researchers have also considered the amount of time adolescents spend in extracurricular activities. The more time adolescents spend in structured extracurricular activities, the less time they have to become involved in unsupervised activities (Mahoney et al., 2000). In contrast, however, Marsh (1992) found that excessive extracurricular activity participation may decrease the time adolescents spend in their academic studies. The over-scheduling hypothesis (Mahoney, Harris, & Eccles, 2006) posits that youth who participate in too many extracurricular activities could experience poor adjustment and stress, spend less time with family, and experience an early movement into adult roles (Rosenfeld & Wise, 2000). Although over-scheduling has been found to have negative effects on youth outcomes, other researchers have found that the benefits of extracurricular activity involvement increased as the level of participation increased (Mahoney et al., 2006). However, Luthar and colleagues (2006) found youth were more likely to experience negative effects of high participation when they perceived their parents were critical of their engagement or if their parents had no expectations of their performance.

Current Study

There is a lack of research considering the differences among adolescents who participate at different roles since past research has not specifically focused on adolescent’s leadership role in extracurricular activities. To add to existing literature, we will examine how support from individuals in these contexts influence adolescents’ perceptions of their leadership skills. In this study, we give particular attention to parental school support, adult support at school when examining the participation role (non-participant, participant, or leader) of adolescents in sport, school, and community extracurricular activities. The central focus of this investigation was to determine how adolescents’ involvement roles in extracurricular activities influenced their self-perception of their leadership skills. The objectives of the study were to:


88

• Determine the influences of parental school support and adult support for school on the development of adolescent’s leadership skills.

• Examine gender differences in adolescent leadership skill development.

• Examine the effects of male and female adolescents’ involvement role (non participant verses participant; participant verses leader/captain) in various (sports, community, and school) extracurricular activities on adolescent’s perceptions of their leadership skills.

Based upon the objectives of the research study and past literature, several hypotheses have been developed. We hypothesized that adult support would positively influence how adolescent’s viewed their leadership skills. Secondly, we hypothesized that the gender differences would be associated with differences in how youth viewed their leadership skills in various types of extracurricular activities while serving in different roles. Although researchers have examined how the role of participation in different types of extracurricular activities influences adolescent development (Fredricks, et al., 2006; Eccles & Barber, 1999), this study was conducted to contribute to existing literature by exploring influences of adult support and extracurricular activity participation on adolescents’ perceptions of their leadership skills. Findings from this study would inform the practice of leadership education by identifying the effects of different types of adult support on adolescent leadership skills development. Additionally, the effects of adolescent’s involvement in extracurricular activities need to be examined so that leadership educators can be better equipped to more effectively implement leadership skill development programs for youth. This would aim to better serve those youth who are actively involved in structured out of school time, as well as those who are less engaged.

Method At the request of a Superintendent interested in further developing the leadership capacity of the broad spectrum of high school students in his district, baseline data were collected from youth in each of his three public high schools. Students who participated in the survey resided in a suburban area located in northern Kentucky. Adolescents surveyed ranged from the ages of 13 through 19 in grades 9 through 12. Since every student was enrolled in an English class, two classes per grade at the general and advanced level were randomly selected. Every effort was made to provide each student the same opportunity for selection while stratifying by grade. The sample included 217, 212, and 218 youth from each high school within the district. This yielded a sample population of 720 in 26 classes,


89

of which 697 had parental consent. There was a response rate of 93% since 647 youth assented to participate in this study. Due to stratified sampling strategy, respondents represented a fairly equal distribution across all grade levels: 149 freshman, 158 sophomores, 181 juniors, and 159 seniors. In the sample, 358 were female and 289 were males. The sample was predominantly white (92%), which was representative of the overall student body population. Only about 1.2 % of the students classified themselves as African-American, 1.4% were Asian, and 5.4 % reported having another racial identity.

Procedure

Although one survey was used to assess students’ perceptions, the items used were adapted from multiple research instruments, which included the Youth-Adult Involvement and Interaction Rating Scale survey (Jones & Perkins, 2005), Search Institute’s Profiles of Student Life: Attitudes and Behaviors survey (1996) and the 4-H Essential Elements (Kress, 2004). The seventy-four question survey (Hancock, 2008) was pilot-tested on 60 high-school students in another school district before being administered at the test site. After the pilot test, reliabilities for survey constructs were examined in order to assure that measurements were valid and reliable. Reliabilities from the pilot test include the following: parental support for school (males α=.644; females α=.732), adult support within schools (males α=.810; females α=.811), and adolescent’s perception of leadership skills (males α=.878; females α=.897). The school superintendent and school board approved the study before researchers entered into the high schools. Administration of the survey was conducted over a four-day time period during a 25-minute period in the selected high-school English classes. Adolescents signed an assent form before taking the survey. No identifying information was obtained from the students who completed the survey. For the current study, the following constructs will be considered: parental support for school, school-based adult support, leadership skills, and extracurricular activity engagement. Measures

Questions for the adult support constructs were adapted from the Youth-Adult Involvement and Interaction Rating Scale survey developed by Jones and Perkins (2005). Items measuring adolescents’ perceptions of adult support were divided into two categories which included parental support for school (males α=.657; females α=.741) and school-based adult support (males α=.820; females α=.822). The three-item parental support for school subscale included: “My parents always encourage me to do well in school,” “My parents are interested in my involvement in school activities” and “My parents participate in activities at my


90

school.” The four-item subscale for school adult support included “There are many caring adults involved in school activities,” “There are many positive adult role models in my school,” “The adults in my school are good examples of positive leaders” and “Adults in my school have the ability to motivate youth to become leaders.” In the analysis, parental support for school and school-based adult support were measured on an interval scale (1 strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree). To measure adolescents’ perceptions of their leadership skills, we asked adolescents to rank themselves using 13 self-assessment statements; items were adapted from Search Institute’s Profiles of Student Life: Attitudes and Behaviors survey (Scales et al., 1999) and 4-H essential elements (Kress, 2004). The mean score for this construct was 3.86 for females and 3.72 for males. Adolescents’ responses could vary from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). These items included “I can organize a group activity,” “I can identify community resources,” “I can get others in my school to volunteer,” and “I can work as a team member.” Reliability and internal consistency of the index was measured using Cronbach’s Alpha (males α=.889; females α=.915). Several demographic indicators were used in the study for the purpose of statistical control and to conduct the analyses based on gender and grade level. These variables include family structure, grade level, and gender. For the purpose of this study, family structure was examined by collapsing categories into a dichotomous variable that included adolescents living with two parents or living in other living situations (i.e., single parent, grandparents). A binary classification was used for grade level to compare 9th and 10th grade levels (lower) to 11th and 12th grade levels (upper). A comparison of upper and lower grade levels was examined because within the high schools, there was an emphasis to encourage older adolescents to serve in a leadership capacity; however, only six students from each school in the 11th and 12th grades participated in the school advisory team and were trained under a core leadership curriculum. After the training session of the core leadership team, the 11th and 12th grade adolescents held school-wide workshops to teach students in upper and lower grade levels leadership principles, so no control groups were examined in this study. Fourteen items were included in the survey to examine adolescents’ participation in sport, school, and community extracurricular activities. Sport extracurricular

activities included team sports, individual sports, and other sports. School

extracurricular activities included band, art, vocational, student government academic team, and other activities. The community extracurricular activity

category included activities such as environmental clubs, 4-H, boy/girl scouts, and religious groups. The activity-type classification was modeled after past research studies (Eccles et al., 1999).


91

Adolescents’ roles in extracurricular activities were examined by classifying adolescents as non participants, participants, or a leader/captain for each of the listed activities. Adolescents’ involvement role in extracurricular activities was examined in two separate phases. First, these high school students were classified as non-participants if they did not participate in any extracurricular activities, as participants if they participated or served as a leader/captain in extracurricular activities. In the second analysis adolescents who participated in at least one extracurricular activity in each context (sports, school-related and community-based) were classified as participants and those who served as a leader/captain in at least one activity in each context were classified as a leader/captain. Regression analyses were performed to determine how parental support for school, school adult support, family structure, grade level, and the role (non-participant verses participant; participant verses a leader/captain) and type (sport, school and community) of activities influenced adolescents’ perception of their leadership skills. A series of models for males and females were examined using regression analysis.

Results Correlations for all study variables are presented along with mean scores for males and females in Table 1. Adolescents’ role in extracurricular activities was examined in two different ways. First, regression equations (Table 2 & 3) were run to compare adolescents who were non-participants (those who did not participate in any extracurricular activities) to those who served as participants

(those who participated or served as a leader/captain in extracurricular activities). Secondly, regression analyses (Table 4 & 5) were also utilized to compare those males and females who were only participants within extracurricular activities to those who served as a leader or captain in one or more extracurricular activities. Independent variables included parental support, school adult support, family structure, grade level, type of activity (sport, school and community), and role in activity (non-participant verses participant; participant verses leader/captain).


92

Tab

le 1

C

orr

elat

ion

Mat

rix

fo

r S

tud

y V

aria

ble

s

SD

.78

.76

.46

1.1

0

.17

.18

.40

7.8

7

NO

TE

: C

orr

elat

ion

co

effi

cien

ts f

or

Fem

ales

ab

ov

e d

iag

on

al;

Co

rrel

atio

n c

oef

fici

ents

fo

r M

ales

bel

ow

dia

go

nal

Mea

n

Mal

es

3.6

8

3.5

6

.69

2.5

6

2.1

3

.03

2.3

5

50

.51

SD

.88

.71

.43

1.0

9

.26

.27

.46

8.5

1

Mea

n

Fem

ale

3.7

3.7

.75

2.5

2.2

.08

2.4

51

.61

8.

.46†

.34†

.07

.13†

.42†

.22†

.31†

-

7.

.39†

.13†

.04

-.0

1

.41†

.14†

-

.24†

6.

.14*

.18†

.02

.12

.45†

-

.14†

.18†

5.

.28†

.08

.05

.22†

-

.26†

.11

.26†

4.

-.0

2

.00

.07

-

.17†

-.0

3

-.1

0

.15†

3.

.16†

.09

-

-.0

4

-.1

1

.04

.02

-.0

3

2.

.34†

-

.17†

.10*

.09

.17*

.12*

.41†

1. -

.45†

.14*

-

.18†

.17†

.09

.26†

.40†

1.

Par

enta

l S

up

po

rt

2.

Sch

oo

l A

du

lt S

upp

ort

3.

Fam

ily

Str

uct

ure

4.

Gra

de

Lev

el

5.

Sch

oo

l E

xtr

acu

rric

ula

r A

ctiv

itie

s

6.

Co

mm

un

ity

7.

Sp

ort

Ex

trac

urr

icu

lar

Act

ivit

ies

8.

Lea

der

ship

Sti

lls


93

This series of analyses examined sport, school, and community extracurricular activities. Tables 2 and 3 below describe the regression equation that shows the significant predictors of adolescents’ perceptions towards their leadership skills for males and females who were involved in sport, school, and community extracurricular activities. The equation also included a comparative analysis between participants and non participants in these extracurricular activities. As indicated in Tables 2 and 3, parental support for school and school adult support were significantly associated with male and female adolescents’ perceptions toward their leadership skills in sport, school, and community activities. Analysis of grade level indicated that males and females in upper grade levels had more positive perceptions of their leadership skills than did younger adolescents. Participation in school and community extracurricular activities significantly predicted the outcomes of adolescents’ perception towards their leadership skills for both males and females. However, female participants in sports significantly viewed their leadership skills more positively than did non participants. Next, the models from the previous regressions were replicated focusing on similar comparisons as in Tables 2 and 3, but also investigating the influence of participant and leader/captain involvement roles. Significant predictors of adolescents’ perceptions of their leadership skills that are based upon different types of extracurricular activities are reported in Tables 4 and 5. Table 2 Standardized Regression Coefficients for Adolescents’ Perceptions of Leadership

Skills by Type of Extracurricular Activity Comparing Participants and Non

Participants for Males

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Sport School Community β (SE) β (SE) β (SE)

Independent Variables Parental Support .305*** (.636) .305*** (.591) .300*** (.593)

School Adult Support .271*** (.617) .272*** (.592) .271*** (.592)

Family Structure -.102 (.920) -.085 (.054) -.124 (.873)

Grade Level .131** (.867) .108** (.889) .112** (.820)

Participant .055 (.552) .154*** (.829) .175** (.672)

Constant 29.61** 2.408 29.29** 2.299 29.84** 2.303

Adjusted R2

N

.255 289

.274 .281

Note: * p< .05; **p<.01; *** p< .001


94

Table 3 Standardized Regression Coefficients for Adolescents’ Perceptions of Leadership

Skills by Type of Extracurricular Activity Comparing Participants and Non

Participants for Females

Model 1 Sport

Model 2 School

Model 3 Community

β (SE) β (SE) β (SE)

Independent Variables Parental Support .359 *** (.532) .308 *** (.503) .380 *** (.494)

School Adult Support .210 *** (.608) .217 *** (.583) .198 *** (.595)


Grade Level .130 ** (.817) .070 (.782) .106 ** (.795)

Participant .125 * (.455) .270*** (.306) .137*** (.584)

Constant 27.160 2.423 28.065 2.316 27.474 2.369

Adjusted R2

N

.28 358

.32

.29

Note: * p< .05; **p<.01; *** p< .001


Skills by Type of Extracurricular Activity Comparing Leaders and Participants for

Males

Model 1 Sport

Model 2 School

Model 3 Community


Independent Variables

Parental Support .308 *** (.613) .315*** (.590) .326 *** (.589)



Grade Level .130 ** (.860) .121* (.827) .101 ** (.827)

Leader .104 * (.870) .131* (.408) .147*** (.584)

Constant 29.64 2.394 27.566 2.375 29.186 2.315

Adjusted R2

N

.25 147

.29

.27

Note: * p< .05; **p<.01; *** p< .001


95


Skills by Type of Extracurricular Activity Comparing Leaders and Participants for

Females

Model 1 Sport

Model 2 School

Model 3 Community


Independent Variables Parental Support .375 *** (.532) .353 *** (.506) .398 *** (.488)



Grade Level .098 (.817) .117* (.791) .108 ** (.798)

Leader .108 * (.455) .169*** (.373) .117** (.584)

Constant 27.22 2.434 27.566 2.376 27.373 2.375

Adjusted R2

N

.28 187

.29

.29

Note: * p< .05; **p<.01; *** p< .001

In the regression equations in Tables 4 and 5, we found that parental support and school adult support was a significant predictor of adolescents’ perception of their leadership skills for males and females. Grade level of adolescents was a significant predictor of adolescents’ perceptions of their leadership skills for those in upper-grade levels except for males who were leaders in sports. Regression analyses of extracurricular sport activities indicated that those who were serving as a leader/captain in more than one sport activity significantly reported having more positive perceptions of their leadership skills. Interestingly, when participants were compared to leaders, males and females who reported themselves as leaders had more positive perceptions towards their leadership skills than participants regardless of what type of activity they were involved in.

Conclusion

The purpose of the study was to extend the literature by examining the influence of school based adult support, parental school support, and involvement roles on adolescents’ perceptions of their leadership skills. Findings from this study extend prior research by examining the differences in adolescents’ perceptions toward their leadership skills based upon their involvement level in sport, school, and community extracurricular activities. Consistent with the social learning theory, our findings suggest that adults in the home and school environment can significantly influence how adolescents’ view their leadership skills. Similar to past research, our study findings indicated that parental support was a significant predictor of adolescents’ perception toward their leadership skills in sport, school,


96

and community extracurricular activities for those who were participants or served as a leader/captain in these activities. Recent studies have shown that adolescents who participate in extracurricular activities have greater opportunities to build their leadership skills through positive, active, and constant support from adults in a mentoring culture (Van Linden & Fertman, 1998). Further, researchers suggest that mentoring should be formalized, using best practices, while supporting informal mentoring through education and training (Inzer & Crawford, 2005). Our research findings indicate that extracurricular activity involvement roles influence adolescents’ perceptions of their leadership skills. These findings suggest that youth may benefit from more involved leadership roles, such as an official position. Leadership educators should consider the effects of adolescents’ embeddedness within their family, school, and community on perceptions toward their leadership skills when developing leadership opportunities for youth. For instance, leadership development efforts in extracurricular activities should encourage youth-adult partnerships across multiple contexts to facilitate leadership skill development among adolescents. Leadership educators should also incorporate youth-driven activities within student organizations and community projects, offering students an active role in developing their own leadership capacity. This study examined adolescents’ perception of their leadership skills based on gender differences since previous findings from research that examine sport involvement of males and females were mixed. Gender differences in social competencies and positive values are common among youth (Leffert et al., 1998). Interestingly, the current research findings suggest that females in sport activities had significantly more positive perceptions of their leadership skills than males. Further, our research findings suggest that participation in sport extracurricular activities is more likely to influence the perception of leadership skills among female adolescents who serve in leadership roles than males. Further research is needed to examine gender differences in the influence of particular extracurricular activities on adolescent leadership skills. Adults working with youth in sports should especially focus on providing males with leadership development opportunities. This could be achieved by creating more leadership roles on athletic teams in addition to team captain. Although the current study extends past research, there were several limitations in the current study. Adolescents’ participation roles in extracurricular activity were reported for the current school year only and were not assessed over time. Although adolescents were told to report their involvement in extracurricular activities for the current school year, some students may have overestimated or underestimated their participation levels. Future studies should use aggregate


97

indices to measure and analyze activity involvement and roles instead of focusing on individual activity. Further, this study did not examine the frequency of activity involvement, the length of time spent in the participation role, the tasks adolescents completed in their participation role, and adolescents’ motivations for participating or not participating in extracurricular activities. Future research should consider collecting data to capture these dimensions of extracurricular activity involvement. In this cross sectional study, self-reported data was collected from adolescents on how they perceive their leadership skills. Future research should collect longitudinal and multi-informant data from adults and parents instead of relying on adolescents’ reports to determine levels of school support among adults. Collecting data from parents and teachers would provide researchers with an enhanced idea of adult levels of support. Future studies should also collect data from other school districts with more diverse student populations. The same findings may vary if the sample included ethnically diverse adolescents from urban areas.

Implications Based upon findings from this study, adolescents should be encouraged to become involved in extracurricular activities and explore their individual potential as leaders. This study revealed that youth perceptions of their leadership skills are influenced by parents and other adults; therefore, leadership educators need to find ways, such as youth-adult partnerships, to involve parents and other adults in extracurricular activities. Our findings indicate that youth at higher grade levels reported higher perceived leadership skills than lower grade levels; therefore, recommendations include more involvement in youth/adult mentoring opportunities for younger students that focus on building leadership skills. Moreover, it is important that leadership educators can facilitate leadership skill development by providing youth with opportunities to practice their leadership skills in a safe environment with supportive adults. Giving adolescents a voice in decision making processes is one way that leadership educators can facilitate the development of adolescent leadership skills. Adults who interact with adolescents should continue to support and encourage them to become engaged in school and community contexts and remain active throughout their adolescent years and in to adulthood. Based upon these conclusions, further research is warranted to examine the continuing influence of adult support on adolescents’ perceptions of their leadership skills.


98

References Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press. Benson, P. (2006). All kids are our kids: What communities must do to raise

scaring and responsible children and adolescents. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Benson, P., & Pittman, K. (Eds.) (2001). Trends in youth development: Visions,

realities and challenges. Medford, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Bloomfield, C. J., & Barber, B. L. (2011). Developmental experiences during

extracurricular activities and Australian adolescents’ self-concept: Particularly important for youth from disadvantaged schools. Journal of

Youth and Adolescence, 40, 582-594. Crosnoe, R. (2001). The social world of male and female athletes in high school.

Sociological Studies of Children and Youth, 8, 87-108. Eccles, J., & Barber, B. (1999). Student council, volunteering, basketball, or

marching band: What kind of extracurricular involvement matters? Journal of Adolescent Research, 14, 10-43.

Eccles, J., & Gootman, J. (Eds.) (2002). Community programs to promote youth

development. National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Eccles, J., & Templeton, J. (2002). Extracurricular and other after-school

activities for Youth. Review of Education, 26, 113-180. Englund, M., Egeland, B., & Collins, A. (2008). Exceptions to high school

dropout predictions in a low-income sample: Do adults make a difference? Journal of Social Issues, 64, 77-93.

Fredricks, J., & Eccles, J., (2006). Extracurricular involvement and adolescent

adjustment: Impact of duration, number of activities, and breadth of participation. Applied Developmental Science, 10, 136-146.

Fredricks, J. A., & Eccles, J. (2008). Participation in extracurricular activities in

the middle school years: Are there developmental benefits for African American and European American youth? Journal of Youth and

Adolescence, 37, 1029-1043.


99

Gambone, M. A., & Arbreton, A. J. A. (1997). Safe havens: The contributions of

youth organizations to healthy adolescent development. Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventures.

Hancock, D. L. (2008). Adolescent engagement in school and community

extracurricular activities: Influences on developmental assets (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY.

Inzer, L. D., & Crawford, C. B. (2005). A Review of Formal and Informal

Mentoring: Processes, Problems, and Design. Journal of Leadership

Education, 4, 31-50. Jones, K. R. (2004). An assessment of perceptions and experiences in community-

based youth-adult relationships. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Pennsylvania State University, University Park.

Jones, K. R. (2009). Influences of youth leadership within a community-based

context. Journal of Leadership Education, 7, 246-264. Jones, K., & Perkins, D. (2005). Determining the quality of youth-adult

relationships within community-based youth programs. Journal of

Extension, 43, 5. Kress, C. (2004). Essential elements of 4-H youth development.

Available online: http://www.national4-H headquarters.gov/library/elements.ppt

Larson, R. W., & Verma, S. (1999). How children and adolescents spend time

across the world: Work, play, and developmental opportunities. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 701-736.

Leffert, N., Benson, P. L., Scales, P. C., Sharma, A. R., Drake. D. R., & Blyth, D.

A. (1998). Developmental assets: Measurement and prediction of risk behaviors among adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, 2, 209-230.

Linver, M. R., Roth, J. L., & Brooks, G. J. (1999). Patterns of adolescents’

participation in organized activities: Are sports best when combined with other activities? Developmental Psychology, 45, 354-367.


100

Ludden, A. B. (2011). Engagement in school and community civic activities among rural adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40, 1254-1270.

Luthar, S. S., & Shoum, K. A., (2006). Extracurricular involvement among

affluent youth: A scapegoat for “ubiquitous achievement pressures?” Developmental Psychology, 42, 583-597.

Mahoney, J. L, Harris, A. L., & Eccles, J. S. (2006). Organized activity

participation, positive youth development, and the over-scheduling hypothesis. Social Policy Report: Giving Child and Youth Development

Knowledge Away, 20, 3-32. Mahoney, J. L., & Stattin, H. (2000). Leisure time activities and adolescent anti-

social behavior: The role of structure and social context. Journal of

Adolescence, 23, 133-127. Marsh, H. (1992). Extracurricular activities: Beneficial extension of the traditional

curriculum or subversion of academic goals? Journal of Educational

Psychology, 84, 553-562. Moore, K. A., Hatcher, J. L., Vandivere, S., & Brown, B. V. (2000). Children’s

behavior and well-being: Findings from the national survey of America’s

families. Washington DC: Child Trends. Rosenfeld, A., & Wise, N. (2000). The over-scheduled child: Avoiding the hyper- parenting trap. New York: St. Martin’s Griffin. Scales, P., & Leffert, N. (1999). Developmental Assets: A Synthesis of the

Scientific Research on Adolescent Development. Minneapolis: Search Institute.

Search Institute (1996). Profiles of student life: Attitudes and behaviors.

Available online at: http://www.search-institute.org/surveys/ab.html Van Linden, J. A., & Fertman, C. I. (1998). Youth leadership: A guide to

understanding leadership development in adolescents. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Zill, N., Nord, C. W., & Loomis, L. S. (1995). Adolescents time use, risky

behavior, and outcomes: An analysis of national data. A report by Westat, Inc. for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.


101

Author Biographies

Donna Hancock is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Child and Family Development at the University of Georgia. Her research interests include examining the predictors and consequences of parenting behaviors and adolescent/emerging adult outcomes. In addition, she also examines the intergenerational transmission of problem behaviors among adolescents and emerging adults. Currently, Donna is a Research Assistant at the University of Georgia. Dr. Patricia Dyk is an Associate Professor in the Department of Community and Leadership Development at the University of Kentucky. She is also the Director of the Center for Leadership Development. Her research work focuses on the social and economic well-being of families and children in the community and policy contexts, with particular interest in low-income rural families. Dr. Kenneth Jones is an associate professor in the Department of Community and Leadership Development at the University of Kentucky. His research interests include assessing youth-adult relationships within community contexts, understanding the role of youth-adult partnerships in nurturing youth leadership, positive youth development, and theoretical approaches to community development initiatives. Kenneth has worked in various areas from program development at the community level to research and evaluation of youth civic engagement, youth-adult relationships and other issues affecting community-based programs. Dr. Jones is also the Director of the Program and Staff Development unit for the University of Kentucky Cooperative Extension Service. In this role his duties include providing statewide direction for program development and evaluation and training of county-based and state-level Cooperative Extension staff and faculty.


102

What Managerial Leadership Behaviors do Student

Managerial Leaders Need? An Empirical Study of

Student Organizational Members

Tim O. Peterson, Ph.D.

Associate Dean and Professor College of Business

North Dakota State University P. O. Box 6050

Fargo, ND 58108-6050 [email protected]

Claudette M. Peterson, Ed.D.

Assistant Professor School of Education

North Dakota State University P. O. Box 6050

Fargo, ND 58108-6050 [email protected]

Abstract

Student leadership is a buzzword on most university campuses. However, recent research indicates that the leadership learning assumed to be taking place may not have happened at the depth currently believed. One explanation is that, as management education and development scholars, we are not clear on what leadership skills these student leaders require. This manuscript identifies the critical managerial leadership behaviors these student leaders need to successfully move their student organizations forward. It is based on empirical data from student members of the very organizations the student leader is trying to influence.

Introduction and Background

Student leadership is a buzzword on most university campuses in both curricular and co-curricular settings. Many business schools declare in their mission statements that they are developing leaders, ethical leaders, or business leaders (Texas A&M University, 2010; Rutgers University, 2010; Pepperdine University, 2010). Leadership scholars have published journal articles (Eich, 2008) and books claiming that leadership can be taught (Northouse, 2010; Parks, 2005). Several books have recently been published that focus specifically on student leadership


103

(Komives, Lucas, & McMahon, 2007; Kouzes & Posner, 2008; Roberts, 2007; Shankman & Allen, 2008). Student affairs offices declare that students who participate in student organizations are developing leadership abilities – or at least getting leadership experience. There is a whole industry that caters to student leadership development programs such as Leadershape (2010), LeadAmerica (2010), and Dance Floor Theory (Swift Kick, 2010). However, a tendency to slap the label leadership on programs not grounded in leadership theory or leadership development exists (Boyd, 2011). Kelling and Hoover (2005) posit that students can develop leadership capacity within student-based clubs and organizations. However, Roberts (2007) indicates that recent research demonstrates that the leadership learning that was assumed to be taking place in student organizations may not have been happening at the level believed. The real question is: What do these student leaders really need to learn so that they can lead while in college and also lead in the future when they enter the workforce? This paper will first develop the literature around the topic of managerial leadership, describe the methodology used to conduct this empirical study, then present the results followed by a discussion of the findings. This paper will conclude with limitations and future research on this topic.

Literature Review It is important to differentiate between a leader and a manager. A manager has an official position within an organization while a leader does not necessarily hold an official position (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). A manager, by holding an official position within the organization, becomes accountable to achieve the organization’s objectives; that individual also receives from the organization specific capacities to influence that are reserved for managers (Peterson & Van Fleet, 2008). On the other hand, a person who does not hold an official position within the organization can still influence members of the organization and by so doing influence the direction of the organization. In order to do this, the person must use personal capacities to influence, since that individual does not have organizational capacities. This is leadership in its purest sense. In summary, a person can be a manager without being a leader. Conversely, a person who is not a manager and has no official power can exhibit leadership. It is also possible to be a manager and exhibit both managerial behavior and leadership behavior; an individual who does this is called a managerial leader.


104

When students who hold an official role in a student organization are discussed on a university campus they are almost always referred to as student leaders rather than student managers. However, they must both manage and lead to be successful in advancing their student organizations toward their objectives. If the only thing they are taught is leadership they are sure to fail, just as they would fail if the only thing they were taught was management. It would be more accurate to describe these students as student managerial leaders. That is, students who hold official positions within the organization, have decision making authority over resources, and are held accountable for the organization’s objectives must function as managers but still attempt to influence the behaviors of the members through establishing a compelling purpose, being credible, exhibiting expertise, and holding the members and themselves accountable to the values and guiding principles of the organization (Peterson & Van Fleet, 2008). This led to the research question that drove this research: What managerial leadership behaviors are essential for student managerial leaders?

All student leaders are assigned responsibility for achievement of the student organization’s objectives through the ethical, effective, and efficient use of the organization’s resources. This cannot be done with only leadership abilities. It also requires managerial abilities. In this study, student managerial leaders are students who (a) hold official positions in a student organization, (b) have legitimate authority such that they have decision-making power over student organizational resources, (c) are held accountable for achieving the student organization’s objectives by student organizational advisors or at least the university, and (d) they attempt to influence others through leadership behaviors. Therefore, these individuals are both managers and leaders. While Katz (1955) argued that different levels of managerial leaders need different amounts of three broad skills (i.e., technical, human, and conceptual), in this study we do not make this distinction. Future research might examine this issue once we have identified the critical managerial leader behaviors desired in student organizations.

Leadership research has been conducted in a variety of contexts. “Military and civil organizations alike have long realized the importance of leadership development in achieving greater overall organizational productivity” (Fine, 2007, p. 66). Boyd (2011) states “there is a need for leadership education/development programs at every level of society, from youth to business executives” (¶ 9). However, often what is defined as leadership development is really managerial development. It is important that leadership educators are clear about the managerial leadership development taking place since managerial behaviors only work in specific situations and other situations require leadership behaviors.


105

Yukl and Van Fleet (1982) conducted the seminal piece of research that focused specifically on managerial leadership behaviors. They collected their data from the perspective of the subordinates serving in the military. The findings determined that, no matter what the situation, subordinates reported that they wanted their managerial leaders to exhibit the following behaviors: performance

emphasis, inspiration, and role clarification (Van Fleet & Yukl, 1986). In specific situations such as a crisis or day-to-day operations the subordinates want their managerial leaders to exhibit additional context-specific behaviors but that is in addition to the three behaviors listed above. These findings, while valuable, also have some significant limitations. As Baruch (1998) points out, it is a limitation that these findings were collected in a military environment. Since this earlier study, Peterson and Van Fleet have extended this work to for-profit organizations (2003), to not-for-profit organizations (2008), and to information technology professionals (Peterson, Brewster, Beard, & Van Fleet, 2005). In every study there is a critical set of managerial leadership behaviors that is identified regardless of the situational factors. This study extends the research stream by surveying members of student organizations to identify which behaviors are desired in student managerial leaders.

Methodology

Participants

The participants were 720 student constituents from 41 different student organizations on a large southwest university campus. They were recruited by convenience sampling (Creswell, 2005; Gay & Airasian, 2000). In this case, the surveys were distributed by students in an undergraduate leadership class. Students enrolled in the leadership class were each asked to distribute 25 copies of the survey to members of the student organization(s) in which they participated. Students who were members of the leadership class did not complete a survey themselves but rather had other members of the student organization complete the surveys. None of the participants who responded to the survey were officers in the student organization nor did they hold any other formal position within the organization. Each participants was asked to complete a one-page questionnaire on the topic of managerial leadership and then to answer a few demographic questions. No extra credit was extended to these participants for their involvement in the study. The completed surveys were returned to the instructor and the data was used in class to inform the students within the class on the critical managerial leadership behaviors desired by organizational student constituents.


106

Instrument

This study used the Managerial Leadership Instrument (MLI) was based on an earlier instrument, the Management Practices Survey (MPS). The MPS was developed by Yukl and Nemeroff (1979) and Yukl, Wall, and Lepsinger (1990). It used a Likert scale to identify important managerial leadership behaviors. A thorough review of the literature since that time uncovered four additional managerial leadership behaviors that had not been included in the MPS. These four behaviors were included in the MLI and tested by Peterson and Van Fleet (2005). In that study all four behaviors were identified by subjects as being important behaviors for MLI. The MLI includes a total of 25 managerial behaviors. Validity and reliability for the MLI were reported in an earlier work (Peterson & Van Fleet, 2003). The MLI has been used in several studies in various organizational contexts: for-profit (Peterson, Brewster, Beard & Van Fleet, 2005; Peterson & Van Fleet, 2003), not-for-profit (Peterson & Van Fleet, 2008), and military (Yukl & Van Fleet, 1982) studies.

The paper-based MLI used in this study was printed on both sides of a single page. The front of the page listed the 25 managerial leadership behaviors. It did not use a Likert scale. The instructions at the top of the page acknowledged that all of the behaviors listed here were important in some way to achieve the organization’s purpose. The participants were then instructed to mark 10 of the 25 behaviors (40%) that they believed to be critical for the student organization to achieve its purpose. They were not asked to rank order the behaviors by perceived importance. This is consistent with Kouzes and Posner’s (2010) method of collecting data for their three-decade study on credibility. The back of the document asked for demographic information such as age, gender, class year, academic major, and the student organization in which they were a member. A copy of the instrument can be obtained from the first author.

Data Analysis

The statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS. After the data set was created, it was checked for errors. Next, consistent with Tukey’s (1977) advice to get to know your data, we produced a series of descriptive and exploratory data analyses to examine the data. We used SPSS’s Explore function to determine outliers, unusual values, and peculiarities in the data set. Each finding was traced back to the original questionnaire and was corrected before any further analysis was done. After the exploratory examination, we used the SPSS Frequencies tool under Descriptive Statistics to first examine the frequency of selection for each of the managerial leadership behaviors. Next, we used the inference about a proportion as presented in Ott (1984) to identify the critical managerial leadership behaviors.


107

Results The mean age of the participants was 20 years with a range from 17 to 29 years of age. Thirty-three percent of the sample was male and 67% female. This is consistent with the current enrollment pattern at this specific university. Twenty-four percent of the subjects were freshmen, 29% were sophomores, 28% were juniors, 18% seniors, and 1% fifth-year seniors. Students representing 91 different majors and 41 different student organizations took part in the study.

Frequency scores for each managerial leadership behavior are reported in Table 1. The table contains only abbreviated descriptions of the behavioral statements which are depicted in bold type within the instrument itself. For example, the first entry in Table 1 names builds trust (is credible) as the managerial leadership behavior; the entire phrase is “Student leader has a presence about him or her that builds trust, commands attention, is authentic, and credible.” The behaviors are listed in the order of descending frequency. The table shows that there are positive values in all cells. This result supports the contention that all of the managerial leadership behaviors are important to at least some of the participants. If the subjects felt all of the behaviors were equally important, we would have found the same number of marks by each behavior [(720 subjects X 10 marks per subject)/25 behaviors=288 marks by each behavior]. Examination of Table 1 shows that this is not true. Therefore, some managerial leadership behaviors are believed to be critical by more participants than are others.

The next step was to identify the critical few from the important many managerial leadership behaviors. We did this by calculating an upper confidence coefficient equal to three standard deviations using Ott’s (1984) formula for determining confidence coefficients for proportions. All subjects were asked to select (but not rank order) 10 of the 25 behaviors on the MLI (40%). We then calculated the upper confidence coefficient representing the 95% confidence area. The test value (.40 + (3 x .018)) was calculated at 45.5%. In the Kouzes and Posner (1993) original credibility study, they focused on the personal traits and characteristics that were identified as crucial by more than 50% of the responding managers. To ensure that we were conservative in our identification of critical behaviors, we rounded the calculated percentage of 45.5% value to 50%. Therefore, all frequency percent values that are equal to or exceed 50% are considered critical. Those critical managerial leadership behaviors that meet this criterion are highlighted in Table 1.


108

Table 1: Prevalence of Managerial Leadership Behaviors (N = 720) Behavior n %

Builds trust (is credible) 545 75.7

Takes the initiative (solves problems) 455 63.2

Is friendly and considerate 452 62.8

Builds team 447 62.1

Stimulates enthusiasm (inspires) 423 58.8

Delegates authority 383 53.2

Informs about responsibilities 376 52.2

Keeps employees informed 362 50.3

Creates a clear and compelling direction 348 48.3

Provides praise and recognition 328 45.6

Emphasizes performance 309 42.9

Gets employees to be friendly with each other 279 38.8

Emphasizes goals 266 36.9

Plans 256 35.6

Coordinates the work 247 34.3

Establishes contacts 243 33.8

Consults employees 232 32.2

Disciplines 224 31.1

Measures progress 223 31.0

Rewards performance (motivates) 210 29.2

Restrains employees from arguing 151 21.0

Obtains resources 138 19.2

Determines training needs 122 16.9

Eliminates obstacles 106 14.7

Identifies and enforces the norms 72 10.0

Note. The bolded entries identify behaviors that were judged to be critical managerial leadership

behaviors. The word(s) in parentheses is the more common way of expressing this behavior.

Discussion

Eight of the 25 managerial leadership behaviors in the instrument were identified as critical by participants in this study. The behavior identified most often as critical by study participants (75.7%) is shown in the tables as builds trust, is

credible. The extended behavioral statement is “Student leader has a presence about him or her that builds trust, commands attention, is authentic, and credible.” This is supported by the extensive leadership research done by Kouzes and Posner who claim that “credibility is the foundation of leadership” (2002, p. 32). Being credible makes the student managerial leader a believable source of information. One characteristic that Kouzes and Posner’s research (2002) identifies as necessary to establish credibility is honesty. This is consistent with Martin’s


109

(2010) interviews with top executives and Kelling and Hoover (2005) findings from student collegiate clubs and organizations in the Ukraine. When they were asked what makes a leader credible, heading the list was honesty and integrity. Keyton and Smith (2009) cite several sources identifying trust as a necessary characteristic of managers in order for an organization to be effective. Scandura and Pellegrini (2008) agree that trust is necessary in a supervisor-subordinate relationship in order to have high quality work outcomes. The managerial leadership behavior labeled in the tables as stimulates enthusiasm,

inspires was identified as critical by 58.8% of study participants. The extended behavioral statement is “Student leader stimulates enthusiasm among organizational members for the work and builds members confidence in their ability to perform assignments successfully.” The behavior definition stimulates

enthusiasm is related to the abstract concept of inspiration. This supports the findings of Kouzes and Posner (1993) who also found that inspiration is what constituents want from their leaders. It was not surprising that these two sets of behaviors related to credibility and inspiration were identified as critical. After surveying 25,000 people on three different occasions Kouzes and Posner (2002) found that 64% of respondents identified inspiration as one of the critical characteristics that established a leader’s credibility. While inspiration consistently appears as a critical aspect of managerial leadership, very little empirical research has been done on this topic. Another managerial leadership behavior identified as critical by 62.8% of participants in the current study is shown in the tables as is friendly and

considerate. The extended behavioral statement is “Student leader is friendly, supportive, and considerate in his or her behavior toward organizational members and tried to be fair and objective.” This is consistent with the findings of Yukl, Gordon, and Taber (2002) which again confirm the importance of consideration. It is interesting to note that consideration is one of the first two leadership behaviors identified as far back as the 1950s in the Ohio State Studies. Halpin (1957) identified this as a primary behavior of Air Force officers, and Fleishman (1957) identified it as a primary behavior of supervisors in for-profit organizations. The implication for the student managerial leader is that student members of their organization want to be treated supportively and fairly. They want a managerial leader who is friendly and is concerned about them. If student managerial leaders exhibit this type of behavior they build up an emotional bank account for the crisis moments when they may not have as much time to focus on relationships with the student members. The managerial leadership behavior identified as critical by 63.2% of participants was takes initiative (solves problems). The extended behavioral statement is “Student leader takes the initiative in proposing solutions to serious work-related


110

problems and acts decisively to deal with such problems when a prompt solution is needed.” This may seem contradictory since 53.2% of participants identified delegates

authority as a critical behavior of student managerial leaders. The extended behavioral statement for this behavior is “Student leader delegates authority and responsibility to organizational members and allows them to determine how to do their work.” This is not necessarily contradictory, because it appears that the type of problems they want their student managerial leaders to solve are usually the complex, ambiguous, unstructured, and knotty problems that are unexpected and require quick resolution (Weick, 2002). When these types of problems arise a crisis can occur. Crises call for both strong cognitive ability and a strong will to act since there are irreversible losses on the line. Under these circumstances, student constituents are anxious and want their managerial leaders to take initiative and act decisively. Weiss (2002) reports that the most important behavior in regulating this anxiety is a clear-thinking leader. Mitroff (1998) and Heifetz (1994) have both found that those managerial leaders who can challenge us to face problems, formulate solutions, and inspire us to learn new ways are what people are looking for in a crisis situation. However, in a non-crisis situation, organizational members want to have the opportunity to do the work and learn to solve more routine problems. The implication for the student managerial leader is that the ability to solve problems needs to be developed in themselves and in subordinate organizational members. As part of learning how to solve problems, student managerial leaders need to also learn how to inform organizational members about their responsibilities in implementing the solution to the problem and how to keep organizational members informed about progress toward completion. These are two additional managerial leadership behaviors identified as critical by the subjects in this study. Both these behaviors relate to communication; the first (informs about

responsibilities) focuses on communication within the student organization while the second (keeps organizational members informed) requires effective communication between the managerial leader, the organization members, other organizations, and school administration. The behavior listed in the tables as informs about responsibilities was identified by 52.2% of study participants as a critical behavior. The extended behavioral statement is “Student leader informs organizational members about their duties and responsibilities, specifies the rules and policies that must be observed, and lets members know what is expected of them.” As Bennis and Goldsmith (1994)


111

posit, informing organizational members about their responsibilities is how leaders translate their purpose into actions. Yukl and Van Fleet (1982) call it role clarification. Kouzes and Posner (2008) argue that it is the first step in helping others to act. The behavior listed as keeps organizational members informed was identified by 50.3% of participants as a critical behavior. The extended behavioral statement is “Student leader keeps organizational members informed about developments that affect their work, including events in other student organizations or outside the organization, and decisions made by higher administration.” Just as people need to know what is expected of them as described above, they also need feedback on the organizational objectives and the progress being made. Organizational member also need to be kept informed on external forces that could affect their efforts. The leader so often acts as a liaison to the external stakeholders of the organization while organization members focus on the immediate tasks at hand. Therefore, it is important for the leader to remember to share this information with the members of the organization. The managerial leadership behavior identified as critical by study participants (62.1%) is shown in the tables as builds team. The extended behavioral statement is “Student leader builds and maintains a strong effective team that recognizes the importance of shared purpose and mutual accountability.” In classroom settings and student organizations, the word team is often used indiscriminately when perhaps the word group would be more accurate. The definition of team used in this situation is that of Katzenbach and Smith (1993) that for a group of people to come together and form a team they had to have a clear performance challenge that was translated into a shared purpose. Without the other critical behaviors, effective teamwork will not occur. For example the student managerial leader must be credible in order to bring a compelling purpose to the members and to inspire them to coalesce into an effective team. The ability to translate the shared purpose into individual team member responsibilities and the ability to provide feedback and information to the team members assists in holding the team together. It is not surprising that Katzenbach and Smith (1993) found that interpersonal skill is one of the key competencies required in a team. Anderson (2002) argues that managerial leaders must be proactive and build their team before a crisis occurs. The team cannot be built during a crisis; it must be built during the stable times and then maintained during the crisis.


112

Implications

There is a clear implication in this study for management and leadership educators. Table 2 shows the eight managerial leadership behaviors identified by student constituents as critical from the 25 behaviors listed in the study. Columns two, three, and four show whether these same managerial leadership behaviors were identified in the for-profit (Peterson, Brewster, Beard, & Van Fleet, 2005; Peterson & Van Fleet, 2003), the not-for-profit (Peterson & Van Fleet, 2008), and the military (Yukl & Van Fleet, 1982) studies. Table 2 Managerial Behaviors of Critical Importance - Comparison of Results of Four Studies

Managerial Leadership Behavior Current Study

For-Profit Study

Not-For-Profit Study

Military Study

Builds trust (is credible) X X X N/A

Takes initiative (solves

problems)

X X X X

Is friendly and considerate X X X X

Builds team X X X N/A

Stimulates enthusiasm (inspires) X X X X

Delegates authority X X - -

Informs about responsibilities X X X X

Keeps employees informed X X X -

Note. N/A notation indicates that managerial behaviors Builds teams and Builds

trust (Is credible) were only identified after the military study was conducted.

It may seem strange to readers that building teams and is credible are not listed as managerial leadership behaviors identified by subordinates in the military setting. In fact, those are new managerial leadership behaviors that have been identified since the military study was conducted and included in the later research. If this study were repeated today with those two behaviors included as options, it is difficult to imagine that military members would not want their leaders to exhibit both team-building behavior and credibility, but that is a topic for future research. Vogelaar (2007) notes that since the Cold War changes in the military environment have led to the need for changes in leadership styles. Since it has been almost three decades since the original research by Yukl and Van Fleet


113

(1982), perhaps it is time to replicate the original study with the additional managerial leadership behaviors included in the instrument.

However, the implication in the present study for management and leadership educators is very real. If we teach the eight managerial leader behaviors identified in Table 2 to our student managerial leaders in the classroom and allow them to practice these behaviors in their student organizations, it would pay dividends for these students when they enter the workforce, whether that is in the for-profit, not-for-profit, or military sector. This is an important implication of this study. A variety of leadership development courses could be developed around these eight behaviors. For example a freshmen/sophomore course for aspiring student managerial leaders could be developed to introduce and practice the eight critical behaviors identified in Table 2. The topic of credibility could be introduced and practiced using the book Credibility: How Leaders Gain and Lose It, Why People

Demand It (Kouzes & Posner, 2011). Problem solving could be introduced using an instrument such as the Creative Problem Solving Profile (Basadur, Graen, & Wakabayashi, 1990). This instrument allows individuals to identify their own problem solving preference, but also has implications for formation of effective teams (Basadur & Head, 2001). Although these are just two of the critical behaviors identified, the rest could also be incorporated in a class like this. A follow-up course for students who actually assume a managerial leadership role could be offered in which the students would apply and reflect upon their experience while serving in an official position in a student organization. This course would allow students to share their experiences while at the same time continuing to develop their managerial leadership behaviors. These types of classes might help us realize Robert’s (2007) desire for a more purposeful and useful leadership development program for students.

Limitations

All studies have limitations; this study is no exception. While the sample is an adequate size, all of the subjects were drawn from one southwest university. While all of the subjects were members of student organizations, additional subjects from other universities would help to make this more generalizable. In addition, an early reviewer suggested that it would be an improvement to have respondents actually rank order the 10 managerial leadership behaviors that they select as critical. In order to be consisted with data collected in previous studies using this instrument, rank order was not used in this study. However, in another


114

study currently underway, the participants have been asked to rank order their choices by importance in order to better clarify this stream of research. Finally, empirical research focused on inspiration would significantly advance the field of leadership. It is interesting to note that most management textbooks today have at least one chapter on motivation and no chapters on inspiration. We need to develop this critical research stream so future managerial leaders can be trained to both motivate and inspire

Future Research

This research extends the seminal work of Yukl and Van Fleet (1982) as well as the work of Peterson and Van Fleet (2003, 2008). The present research is only a first step to examine the critical managerial leadership behaviors required by student managerial leaders. An additional step might be to replicate the process that Yukl and Van Fleet (1982) used in their military study. They collected critical incidents from military members and used content analysis to identify managerial leadership behaviors exhibited by military leaders. Collecting critical incidents from managerial leaders and members in student organization and then conducting a content analysis of these incidents would further triangulate on the critical managerial leadership behaviors. In addition, an analysis of different types of student organizations (e.g., student government, sororities and fraternities, and service organizations) might shed different light on the critical managerial leadership behaviors. In summary, this research has begun the process of identifying the critical managerial leadership behaviors desired by student constituents. The results show that there are new managerial leadership behaviors such as builds the team and is

credible that are critical. This is consistent with the earlier research in the for-profit and not-for-profit fields. But it is only the beginning. Further research will inform those who facilitate student learning in both classroom and co-curricular settings to address issues of managerial leadership that will empower students to lead while they are in college and when they enter the workforce.


115

References

Anderson, D. (2002). Leading in crisis. Executive Excellence, 19(8), 4.

Baruch, Y. (1998). Leadership - Is that what we study? Journal of Leadership

Studies, 5(1), 100-124. Basadur, M. S., Graen, G. B., & Wakabayashi, M. (1990). Identifying individual

differences in creative problem solving style. Journal of Creative

Behavior, 24(2), 111-131. Basadur, M. S., & Head, M. (2001). Team performance and satisfaction: A link to

cognitive style within a process framework. Journal of Creative Behavior,

35(4), 227-248. Bennis, W. G. & Goldsmith, J. (1994). Learning to lead: A workbook on

becoming a leader. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Boyd, B. (2011). From the Editor’s Clipboard: All leadership programs are not

created equal [Editorial] (2011). Journal of Leadership Education, 10(1). Retrieved from http://www.leadershipeducators.org/Resources/Documents/jole/2011_winter/Editors%20Clipboard.pdf

Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and

evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Eich, D. (2008). A grounded-theory of high-quality leadership programs:

Perspective from student leadership development programs in higher education. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15(2), 176-187.

Fine, S. (2007). Over qualification and selection in leadership training. Journal of

Leadership & Organizational Studies, 14(1), 61-68.

Fleishman, E. A. (1957). A leader behavior description for industry. In R. M. Stogdill & A. E. Coons (Eds.), Leader behavior: Its description and

measurement. Columbus: Ohio State University, Bureau of Research. Gay, L.R., & Airasian, P. (2000). Educational research: Competencies for

analysis and application (6th ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.


116

Halpin, A. W. (1957). The leader behavior and effectiveness of aircraft

commanders. In R. M. Stogdill and A. E. Coons (Eds.), Leader behavior:

Its description and measurement. Columbus: Ohio State University, Bureau of Research.

Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press. Katz, R. L. (1955). Skills of an Effective Administrator. Harvard Business

Review, 33(1), 33-42. Katzenbach, J.R., & Smith, D.K. (1993). The wisdom of teams. Boston: Harvard

Business School Press. Kelling, E. & Hoover, T. (2005). A comparative leadership development study

within student collegiate clubs and organizations at an agrarian university in Ukraine and a university within the United States. Journal of

Leadership Education, 4(2), 4-15. Keyton, J., & Smith, F. L. (2009). Distrust in leaders: Dimensions, patterns, and

emotional intensity. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies,

16(1), 6-18. Komives, S. R., Lucas, N., & McMahon, T. R. (2007). Exploring leadership for


Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1993). Credibility: How leaders gain and lose it,

why people demand it. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2002). The leadership challenge: How to keep

getting extraordinary things done in organizations (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2008). The student leadership challenge: Five

practices for exemplary leaders. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2010). The truth about leadership. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass. Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2011). Credibility: How leaders gain and lose it,

why people demand it (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


117

LeadAmerica (2010). Retrieved from http://www.lead-america.org/ LeaderShape (2010). Retrieved from http://www.leadershape.org Martin, D. (2010). Why we can and should teach leadership in higher education.

Investing in the Future: Leadership Development in Higher Education Symposium. Midwest Academy of Management Conference, Grand Forks, North Dakota.

Mitroff, I. (1998). Smart thinking for crazy times: The art of solving the right

problem. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Northouse, P. G. (2010). Leadership: Theory and practice (5

th ed.). Thousand

Oaks: Sage Publications. Ott, L. (1984). An introduction to statistical methods (2nd ed.). Boston: Duxbury

Press. Parks, S. D. (2005). Leadership can be taught. Boston: Harvard Business School

Press. Pepperdine University (2010). Graziado School Mission Statement. Retrieved

from http://bschool.pepperdine.edu/aboutus/mission/ Peterson, T. O. , Brewster, S. R., Beard, J. W., & Van Fleet, D. D. (2005,

November). The impact of situational factors on information system (IS)

managerial leader behaviors: What information system employees want. Southern Management Association Conference, Charleston, South Carolina.

Peterson, T. O., & Van Fleet, D. D. (2003, November). Critical managerial

leadership behaviors: An empirical study of crisis and stable

environments. Southern Management Association Conference, Clearwater Beach, Florida.

Peterson, T. O., & Van Fleet, D. D. (2008). Tale of two situations: An empirical

study of not-for-profit managerial leaders’ behaviors. Public Performance

& Management Review, 31(4): 503-516. Roberts, D. C. (2007). Deeper learning in leadership: Helping college students

find the potential within. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


118

Rutgers University (2010). Rutgers Business School Newark and New Brunswick Mission Statement. Retrieved from http://business.rutgers.edu/default.aspx?id=660

Scandura, T. A., & Pellegrini, E. K. (2008). Trust and leader-member exchange:

A closer look at relational vulnerability. Journal of Leadership &

Organizational Studies, 15(2), 101-110. Shankman, M. L, & Allen, S. J. (2008). Emotional intelligent leadership: A guide

for college students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Swift Kick (2010). Retrieved from http://swiftkickonline.com. . Texas A&M University (2010). Mays Business School Mission Statement.

Retrieved from http://mays.tamu.edu/about-mays/mission-statement/ Tukey, J. W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Reading, PA: Addison-Wesley

Publishing Company. Van Fleet, D. D., & Yukl, G. (1986). Military leadership: An organizational

behavior perspective. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Vogelaar, A. L. W. (2007) Leadership from the edge: A matter of balance.

Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 13(3), 27-42. Weick, K. E. (2002). Leadership when events don’t play by the rules. Reflections.

4(1), 30-32. Weiss, R. P. (2002). Crisis leadership. T+D, 56(3), 28-33. Yukl, G. A., & Nemeroff, W. F. (1979). Identification and measurement of

specific categories of leadership behavior: A progress report. In J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Crosscurrents in leadership (pp. 164-200). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Yukl, G. A., & Van Fleet, D. D. (1982). Cross-situational, multimethod research

on military leader effectiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human

Performance, 30(1), 87-108. Yukl, G. A., Wall, S., & Lepsinger, R. (1990). Preliminary report on validation of

the management practices survey. In K. E. Clark & M. B. Clark (Eds.), Measures of leadership (pp. 223-237). West Orange, NJ: Leadership Library of America.


119

Yukl, G. A., Gordon, A., & Taber, T. (2002). A hierarchical taxonomy of

leadership behaviors: Integrating a half century of behavior research. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 9(1), 15-32.


120

Author Biographies Tim O. Peterson, Ph.D., is an associate dean and professor of Management in the College of Business at North Dakota State University. He received his doctoral degree in Management from Texas A&M University in 1988. In addition to his administrative duties, he teaches leadership courses. His primary research interests are leadership and management education. Claudette M. Peterson, Ed.D., is an assistant professor in the School of Education at North Dakota State University. She received her doctoral degree in Adult Education from Oklahoma State University in 2006. She has previously taught courses in Information Systems and Management departments, but currently teaches in an education doctoral program. Her primary research interests are postsecondary business education and survey research.


121

What’s Context Got To Do With It? An Exploration of

Leadership Development Programs for the Agricultural

Community

Eric K. Kaufman, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor Department of Agricultural and Extension Education

Virginia Tech 2270 Litton Reaves Hall (0343)

Blacksburg, VA 24061 [email protected]

Richard J. Rateau, Ph.D.

Department of Agricultural and Extension Education Virginia Tech

2270 Litton Reaves (0343) Blacksburg VA 24061

[email protected]

Hannah S. Carter, Ph.D.

Director, Wedgworth Leadership Institute for Agriculture and Natural Resources

University of Florida 121B Bryant Hall PO Box 112060

Gainesville, FL 32611 [email protected]

L. Rochelle Strickland, Ph.D.

LEAD21 Program Manager University of Georgia

Agricultural Leadership – Athens 133 Four Towers Building

Athens, GA 30602 [email protected]


122

Abstract

One method to develop leaders is through leadership development programs designed specifically for an intended context. The International Leadership Association (ILA) provides questions for designing programs such programs. This article reflects data collected during the process of developing a leadership program serving the broader agricultural community in Virginia. The International Association of Programs for Agricultural Leadership (IAPAL) reports that programs for leadership development in agricultural contexts typically include 12 seminars over two years, with less than one-third of the seminars agriculturally related. The profile includes sources of financial support and allocation of administrative duties. A survey of agricultural leaders reveals a strong desire for such programming. The stakeholders sought a program including emerging and experienced leaders with travel for on-site experiential learning. The findings have implications for the state and broad leadership development. Those who develop leadership programs for other contexts may benefit from the guiding questions and data.

Introduction

“Our nation is in a leadership crisis, one that requires more and better leadership in all areas of our society” (Eich, 2008, p. 176). This is especially true for the complex world of agriculture, as agricultural professionals face daily challenges. The future success of the agricultural industry depends on strong leaders who can effectively address these challenges (Bradshaw & Rudd, 2009; Diem & Nikola, 2005; Kaufman & Carter, 2005; Kaufman, Rateau, Ellis, Kasperbauer, & Stacklin, 2010). Investment in leadership development is strong (Day, 2001), with a growing number of leadership development programs offered, costing billions of dollars annually (Riggio, 2008). However there is “little agreement about the best strategies [for developing leadership]” (Hackman & Wageman, 2007, p. 43). Designing a quality leadership development program is difficult and requires a systematic approach that considers the unique contextual needs of the program (Bryne & Rees, 2006). Recognizing this need, the 2007-2010 national research agenda for agricultural education and communication included a research priority to “develop and disseminate effective leadership education programs,” with emphasis on addressing the needs of current leaders, and strategies for “designing, disseminating, and evaluating” such programs (Osborne, n.d., p. 12). An additional research priority was to “engage citizens in community action through leadership education and development” (p. 12). These national research priority


123

areas clearly state the need for intentional reflection and planning with leadership development programs. Guiding Questions for Leadership Development Programs

Leadership development programs come in many forms, and there is no one set model that will work for all (Byrne & Rees, 2006; Caffarella, 2002; Cacioppe, 1998). Generally, there is a lack of research detailing which program models are most effective (Conger, 1992). Some scholars and practitioners have proposed models for leadership program design, but they fail to agree on a unifying theory of leadership development (Hackman & Wageman, 2007). In response to these program development issues, the International Leadership Association (ILA) developed Guiding Questions: Guidelines for Leadership

Education Programs. “More than 70 leadership educators contributed at one level or another to this project” (Ritch & Mengel, 2009, p. 217). The guiding questions “explore the content and context of leadership programs” (Ritch, 2010, p. 3) in an effort to guide program design and assessment. The questions were designed to “evoke answers that help leadership educators make important choices about the quality, comprehensiveness and focus of their programs” (p. 2). To effectively develop a program, practitioners must address questions in each of five areas: (a) the context of the program, (b) a conceptual framework for the program, (c) the required content, (d) appropriate teaching and learning strategies, and (e) the desired learning outcomes and methods of assessing the program. The starting point is program context, which can be framed in terms of various “categories of identity, sector, academics, place, discipline, organization, field of practice, and field of leadership” (Ritch, 2010, p. 9). Agriculture as a Context for Leadership Development

Among the different contexts for leadership development, the field of agriculture presents its own unique challenges (Bradshaw & Rudd, 2009; Kaufman, Rateau, Ellis, Kasperbauer, & Stacklin, 2010). The agricultural community faces a wide range of complex contextual challenges, including volatile commodity markets, increased regulatory requirements, agricultural illiteracy, food security issues, changing demographics, natural resource depletion, and economic survival. Not only is agriculture complex and diverse, it is becoming more specialized and facing greater confrontation from external groups. Leaders within this community must be able to function amidst the turmoil and move the community forward. The future of agriculture is dependent upon local leaders guiding advocacy efforts related to change (Diem & Nikola, 2005).


124

Agricultural leadership programs have been reported as having a history of more than 75 years in the United States (Kelsey & Wall, 2003). However, the majority of available literature on modern programs traces their roots to the Kellogg Farmers Study Program (KFSP), which began at Michigan State University in 1965 (Carter, 1999; Case, I. H., 2005; Helstowski, 2001; Lindquist, n.d.). The founders of the KFSP recognized that agriculture was growing more complex and effective leadership was needed in order to protect and guide the future of the industry (Miller, 1976). From the beginning, the KFSP consisted of “workshops and travel seminars intended to provide participants with an understanding of the social, economic, cultural, and political dimensions of public problems” (Howell, Weir, & Cook, 1982, p. 2). “The goal of the program was to provide young agricultural and rural leaders with a broader view of society, as well as a greater sense of the world and how they fit into the bigger picture” (Helstowski, 2001, p. 1). Intended KFSP outcomes included both personal and professional growth, ranging from expansion of personal perspectives and self-esteem to greater decision-making and involvement in leadership positions. During the 1980s, the International Association of Programs for Agricultural Leadership (IAPAL) was formed as a consortium of leadership development programs similar to the KFSP (Lindquist, n.d.). According to Pope (n.d.), the purpose of IAPAL is to enhance leadership development and facilitate the dissemination of valuable information to administrators who conduct their individual programs. By the year 2000 agricultural leadership programs in the United States had graduated over 7,200 participants and received over $15 million in financial support (Case, I. H., 2005; Helstowski, 2001). IAPAL currently includes 41 active programs – 36 in the United States, 2 in Canada, and 3 outside North America (Waldrum, 2009). Despite the success of the Kellogg Farmers Study Program (KFSP) and the programs that spawned from that model, important questions remain for today’s leadership development programs in agricultural contexts. After nearly half a century, is the KFSP model still valid? What do the successful programs look like today? How well do the IAPAL programs align with the programming needs of the agricultural community in the 21st century?

Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this study was to describe agriculture community members’ desires for leadership development programming as represented by and compared to programs associated with the International Association of Programs for Agricultural Leadership (IAPAL). The specific research objectives include the following:


125

• Describe the profile of leadership development programs associated with IAPAL.

• Describe the agricultural community’s interest in a new leadership development program, as perceived in a state that does not have an IAPAL program.

• Identify guiding parameters for an emerging leadership development program, as perceived by key stakeholders within Virginia’s agricultural community.

Procedures

Though the purpose and objectives frame this paper as a report on a formal research project, it was not conceptualized as a research study until after plans for an agricultural leadership program came to fruition in Virginia. Recognizing that the data collected along the way would be valuable to others desiring to develop a similar program, the authors of this paper embarked on a retrospective analysis of the data that contributed to the new program plan. Accordingly, this study can be thought of as a retrospective case study. As a case study, the findings are not generalizable. However, the organization of the data into the identified research objectives may allow for extrapolation of the findings for use in similar program development efforts. The study involved a mixed-methods approach, akin to the explanatory sequential design, beginning with quantitative data collection and concluding with a qualitative research phase to explain the quantitative results (Creswell, 2011). This particular study had three distinct phases:

• Investigate profile of existing programs through face-to-face survey with program directors.

• Explore program interest in Virginia through a mailed survey with key leaders from the target community.

• Explain the program interest and expectations through focus group sessions in the form of a face-to-face meeting with stakeholders.

The following paragraphs describe in more detail the process and participation in each phase of the research. Each phase is associated with a specific research objective.


126

For objective one, the researchers developed a questionnaire for program directors who were current members of the International Association of Programs for Agricultural Leadership (IAPAL). This survey was conducted face-to-face during the 2007 annual IAPAL meeting in Miami, FL. The questionnaire included questions in the following areas – program structure and participant demographics, program evaluation, program staffing and administration, board of directors/advisory committees, alumni associations, and communications. Questions were developed based on the researchers’ experience with IAPAL programs. All of the questions focused on confirmable facts (i.e., participation numbers), so social desirability bias and similar validity issues were not a serious concern. Of the 21 program directors in attendance at the IAPAL meeting, 19 completed the questionnaire for a completion rate of 90.5%. The respondents represented programs within university systems, foundations, independent organizations, and partnerships. Although the majority of respondents represented programs in the United States, two program directors were from Canada. Because no effort was made to follow-up with non-respondents, the findings are limited to those who completed the questionnaire. In pursuit of objective two, the researchers developed a questionnaire for use with stakeholders in a state without an IAPAL program. The questionnaire was developed based on the leadership program development literature as well as findings from objective one. The initial draft of the questionnaire was reviewed by an expert panel, and the panelists offered suggestions for question content and wording. The questionnaire was designed to be administered via United States Mail to leaders identified in the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services’ Directory of Agricultural and Consumer Organizations. To ensure geographic representation, researchers added county Farm Bureau presidents to the study population. Efforts to obtain current contact information for each organization and individual yielded a target population of 252 individuals. To promote a high response rate, the researchers applied Dillman’s (2007) tailored design method for mail surveys. The contacts included a pre-notice letter, the initial survey mailing, a reminder postcard, a replacement survey mailing, and then phone calls to a random sample of non-respondents. However, the phone calls failed to yield sufficient data for assessing non-response bias. Accordingly, the findings are limited to those who responded. Among those invited to participate, 153 submitted usable responses for a response rate of 60.7%. Participants were 78% male, with an average age of 56 years, and an average of 18 years in leadership roles with agricultural organizations. Participants’ organizational affiliations reflect the following areas of agriculture – aquaculture & marine, dairy, education, environment, equine, finance, food industry, forestry, general farm organizations (i.e., Farm Bureau), grains,


127

livestock (including poultry), marketing, nursery and horticulture, and specialty crops. For objective three, the researchers held a meeting with 24 key stakeholders for the prospective program in Virginia, and focus group sessions were held as part of that meeting. Participants were identified based on their ability to represent a unique perspective of the agricultural community in Virginia. One-third of the meeting participants had participated in the mailed survey (completed as part of objective two). Similar to the mailed survey participants, the focus group participants’ organizational affiliations reflected the following areas of agriculture: aquaculture and marine, dairy, education, environment, equine, finance, food industry, forestry, general farm organizations (i.e., Farm Bureau), grains, livestock (including poultry), marketing, nursery and horticulture, and specialty crops. In the recruitment efforts for the meeting, participants were told that part of the purpose of the meeting was to validate findings of recent research concerning the need for leadership development programming within Virginia’s agricultural community. The meeting began with a review of the related research and presentations by representatives from programs affiliated with IAPAL. Participants then worked in small groups to discuss and identify preferences for the following aspects of a new program:

• Program mission, vision, and objectives.

• Appropriate length and frequency of seminars and program.

• Prospects for travel (including in-state, national, and international).

• Criteria and characteristics of program participants.

• Topics, locations, and resources for seminars.

• Tuition and financial support. Following the meeting, researchers emailed the meeting notes to the participants and inviting them to reply with additions or corrections. This form of member checks helps improve the trustworthiness of the findings (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Findings The researchers investigated each study population and related objective separately. The findings are organized accordingly.


128

Objective 1: Describe Profile of IAPAL Programs

The survey of IAPAL programs revealed a profile of existing leadership development programming in the context of agriculture (Table 1). The oldest program was initiated in 1965; the most recent program was initiated in 2003. The average lifetime of the programs surveyed was 24 years. The average length of a program class was 21 months, with an average of 12 seminars held during that time span. On average, 2 of the 12 seminars were held outside of the program’s home state/province. Some program directors reported that 100% of seminars were agriculturally related, whereas other program directors reported less than 5% of seminars being agriculturally related. The average percent of agriculturally related content was 31%. Program directors reported that 63% of participants in their most recent class were male and the majority (53%) was from nonfarm households. The average age of program participants was 38 years old.

Among the IAPAL programs studied, the average tuition/participant fee per class member was $2,974. In contrast, the average total program cost per class member was $14,337. The gap between tuition and actual cost was bridged through a variety of sources of financial support (Figure 1). All of the program directors indicated that individual seminars are evaluated by current class members. However, only 37% of programs have conducted a program evaluation with stakeholders. The identified barriers to program evaluation included time, costs, and methods.

Table 1 Profile of programs associated with the International Association of Programs for

Agricultural Leadership (n = 19).

M SD

Years in existence 24 8.8 Number of program alumni 370 267.2 Number of participants in most recent class 26 5.9 Program length in months 21 3.3 Number of class meetings during program 12 2.2 Number of class meetings held outside program

state/province 2 0.7

Tuition fee per class participant (U.S. $) $2,974 1,913.3 Total program cost per participant (U.S. $) $14,337 6,741.2


129

Figure 1. Sources of financial support for programs associated with the International Association of Programs for Agricultural Leadership (n=19).

Most of the IAPAL programs were housed within a university system, with more than half administered through their Land-Grant University’s Extension system. Program seminars were being delivered through a variety of means, including field experience, lectures/classroom activities, panel discussions, readings, and technology. The administrative leaders for the IAPAL programs were dividing their time among a variety of tasks, with 39% of time spent on program planning, 22% of time spent on fundraising, 21% of time spent on administrative tasks, and 16% of time spent on recruitment.

Objective 2: Describe Interest in a New Leadership Program

A majority of survey participants, 94% (n=144), indicated a desire for leadership development programming beyond current opportunities for Virginia’s agricultural community. Among a list of 25 potential leadership program outcomes, those of greatest interest included:

• “Advocacy for the agricultural community.”

• “Access to new agricultural information and skills.”

• “New partnerships and collaboration across the agricultural community.”

• “Awareness of new technologies that support agricultural production and services.”

• “Knowledge of best practices for a viable agricultural industry.” One survey participant clarified expectations by adding the following comments:

32%

20%17%

14%

11%6%

Donations

Participant Tuition

Foundation / Endowment

Administrative Unit Support

Legislative Appropriation

Other


130

Now more than ever, agriculture needs leaders that are engaged, trained, and competent in advocacy of agricultural issues. Regulations stand as the single greatest threat to agriculture. Knowing how to tell your story effectively, listen to other stories and assimilating all of them into a plan for agriculture that allows our industries to regain profitable and viable, yet in compliance with the latest regulations and technologies, is critical. Agriculture must be engaged with local, state, and national elected officials and organizations if we are to survive long-term.

The agricultural leaders surveyed also provided input on a variety of questions related to program design (Table 2). Most respondents (77%) believed that both emerging and experienced leaders should be included together in an agricultural leadership program. Regarding program length, 65% of survey respondents expressed interest in a program that spans one year or more. With respect to travel, 80% expressed a desire for inclusion of on-site experience in diverse areas of Virginia, 35% expressed a desire for inclusion of on-site experience in another region of the United States, and 12% expressed a desire for on-site experience outside the United States.

With respect to program delivery mechanisms, “interactive workshops” was the most desired format, followed by “experiential activities,” “conference attendance,” and “classroom instruction.” The least desired format was “online communities, lectures, and services.” One survey participant clarified the expectations by offering the following comments:

The proper blend of instruction with experiential activities, social gatherings and other mechanisms is sometimes tricky to achieve. Too much of any one can render a program ineffective. For example, class members love experiential activities, but you must be careful to not become simply an ag tour group. Even when on tour - the purpose is leadership development, and that can be found in many places - not just ag - but certainly within ag as well.

Among preferred host organizations, 70% of Virginia’s agricultural leaders identified their land-grant university’s college of agriculture as a preferred host for the desired program. In the “check all that apply” list, the next most preferred hosts included Virginia Cooperative Extension, the Virginia Farm Bureau Federation, and the Virginia Agribusiness Council. Other listed organizations were identified by less than one-third of respondents.


131

Table 2 Virginia agriculture leaders’ design preferences for a leadership development

program (n=144)

Percent Agreement

Target Audience Emerging leaders Experienced leaders Both emerging and experienced leaders together Both emerging and experienced leaders, in separate programs

5% 2%

77% 16%

Program Length 6-month program 1-year program 2-year program 3-year program Other

30% 41% 17%

7% 5%

Meeting Frequency 1-2 day seminars every month 3-4 day seminars every two months 5-7 day seminars every three to four months Other

60% 14%

3% 23%

Travel Expectations Only local travel and experiences On-site experience in diverse areas of Virginia On-site experience in another region of the U.S. On-site experience outside the U.S. Other

17% 80% 35% 12%

8%

More than three-fourths of survey respondents indicated that their professional organization would likely be willing to sponsor potential participants (Figure 2). Most indicated likely sponsorship levels of less than $1,000; one individual indicated likely sponsorship of $3,500 or more. Collectively, survey responses suggest that organizations would be willing to contribute about $75,000. According to one participant, “organizational sponsorship for cost share may be limited due to tightening budgets and available funds.”


132

Figure 2. Virginia agricultural organizations’ likely sponsorship of program participants in a comprehensive leadership development program (n=144). Objective 3: Identify Parameters for an Emerging Program

With respect to objective three, stakeholder meeting participants reinforced the findings from prior research. Regarding a program mission, some consensus was obtained on the following statement: “Develop leaders who can effectively engage all sectors of Virginia Ag to create collaborative solutions and promote agriculture inside and outside of the industry.” A similar statement was generated for the program vision: “Virginia agriculture will provide a sustainable future for our industry by maximizing our potential for successful growth through a system of networking, collaborative decision making, and development of strong Ag leaders.” In the discussion of program structure, participants expressed a desire for a two-year program with seminars two to three days in length on alternating months. They also emphasized the need for travel as a way of getting program participants out of their comfort zone and exposing them to the state’s diversity. As for travel outside the state, the stakeholders highlighted the value of international experience. They acknowledged concerns about the added expense of international travel, but prioritized it over domestic travel outside the state. As for a target population, stakeholders emphasized the need for diversity within each program class. Specifically, they discussed the need for diversity in age, gender, culture, geographic representation, sector of industry, education, and leadership experience. The stakeholders were hesitant to identify age restrictions but suggested the minimum preferred age may be 25 years old. They recognized the need to serve individuals who have a “vested interest in agriculture,” but they defined that interest broadly. The stakeholders suggested that an ideal class might be composed 50% of agricultural producers and 50% of individuals with

Not Willing to Sponsor

23%

Less than $50031%$500-$999

33%

$1000 or more13%


133

supporting interests. The preferred class size was 20-25 participants, with a maximum of 30 participants per class.

Discussion, Conclusions, and Recommendations

As highlighted in the ILA’s Guiding Questions (Ritch, 2010), the context of the program is an important consideration when assessing and preparing for quality leadership education and development. All leadership education practitioners need to begin their assessment and planning processes with a thorough understanding of their individual program contexts. Those contexts can highlight “important choices about the quality, comprehensiveness and focus of their programs” (p. 2). The issue of context can be framed and interpreted a wide variety of ways, but it is helpful to start by considering what is known about programs that have been designed to serve a similar audience. This multi-level study provided insight to the current practices and desire for leadership development programming in the context of agriculture. Leadership education practitioners who work within the context of agriculture should consider the findings from this study and their relevance for further application. Based on the findings from this study, the goals and structure of the Kellogg Farmers Study Program (KFSP) have lived on through programs affiliated with the International Association of Programs for Agricultural Leadership (IAPAL). The IAPAL programs are diverse, but they continue to reflect the broad goal of the KFSP, “to provide young agricultural and rural leaders with a broader view of society, as well as a greater sense of the world and how they fit into the bigger picture” (Helstowski, 2001, p. 1). In addition, they continue the use of workshops and travel seminars as the primary approach to leadership education and development. Agricultural leaders who are unfamiliar with the KFSP model still express program preferences that align with the model. This can be seen within their preferences for program outcomes, structure, and delivery mechanisms. When Virginia agriculture leaders considered existing opportunities for leadership development for the agricultural community they wanted something more, such as a program like those currently in IAPAL which may be the answer. The primary outcome of the stakeholder meeting was a request to build a program similar to the IAPAL programs across the United States. Accordingly, a specific program plan was created and a director was hired to launch the program. This continued replication of the KFSP and the related IAPAL programs provides


134

further validation of the model developed at Michigan State University in 1965. Despite the fact that the model is nearly a half century old, key components of the model remain relevant for leadership development in agriculture. The findings reported in this paper are not generalizable to other states and programs. However, experts in program development and evaluation are increasingly promoting the value of extrapolation for guiding program development. Without violating principles of generalizability, Gargani and Donaldson (2011) point out that information on past programs can be used to predict future results of other programs. It is in this spirit that practitioners can use the findings presented here to develop and improve their own programs.

Program context is not the end for assessing and planning for leadership education and development. Practitioners need to continue through the remaining aspects of the Guiding Questions document, including conceptual framework for the program, required content, teaching and learning strategies, and desired outcomes. The fact that less than half of the IAPAL programs have conducted program evaluations with stakeholders is disturbing, particularly considering the amount of stakeholder support that is required to sustain the programs. As an association designed to support program administrators, IAPAL should seek out ways to promote and support more comprehensive program evaluation.

Acknowledgement

Portions of this research were funded by the Virginia Agricultural Council.


135

References

Bradshaw, R., & Rudd, R. (2009). A leadership development needs assessment for Virginia Farm Bureau Young Farmers. Proceedings of the Southern

Region Conference of the American Association for Agricultural

Education, 2009, 372-386. Byrne, J. C., & Rees, R. T. (2006). The successful leadership development

program: How to build it and how to keep it going. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Cacioppe, R. (1998). An integrated model and approach for the design of

effective leadership development programs. Leadership & Organization

Development Journal, 19(1), 44-53. doi:10.1108/01437739810368820 Caffarella, R. S. (2002). Planning programs for adult learners: A practical guide

for educators, trainers, and staff developers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Carter, H. S. F. (1999). Evaluation of the Florida Leadership Program for

Agriculture and Natural Resources. University of Florida, Gainesville. Case, I. H. (2005, Summer). Leading ag’s way: Leadership programs develop

spokespersons for agriculture. Farm Forum, 25. Retrieved from http://www.caseih.com/files/tbl_s33Publications/PublicationPDF128/1111/AGISSUESSU05U.PDF

Conger, J. (1992). Learning to lead: the art of transforming managers into

leaders. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed

methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Day, D.V. (2001). Leadership development: A review in context. Leadership

Quarterly, 11(4), 581-613. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(00)00061-8 Diem, K. G., & Nikola, M. P. (2005). Evaluating the impact of a community

agricultural leadership development program. Journal of Extension [On-line], 43(6) Article 6RIB5. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2005december/rb5.shtml


136

Dillman, D. A. (2007). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method:

2007 update with new Internet, visual, and mixed-mode guide (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.


Perspectives from student leadership development programs in higher education. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15(2), 176-187. doi:10.1177/1548051808324099

Gargani, J., & Donaldson, S. I. (2011). What works for whom, where, why, for

what, and when? Using evaluation evidence to take action in local contexts. New Directions for Evaluation, 2011(130), 17-30. doi: 10.1002/ev.362

Hackman, J. R., & Wageman, R. (2007). Asking the right questions about

leadership. American Psychologist, 62(1), 43-47. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.62.1.43

Helstowski, L. W. (2001). The legacy of the ag leadership development program:

Rich heritage cultivates future opportunities (Booklet No. 534). Battle Creek, MI: W.K. Kellogg Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.leadershiponlinewkkf.org/learningcenter/pubs/ag_leadership/Ag_Leadership_Booklet.pdf

Howell, R. E., Weir, I. L., & Cook, A. K. (1982). Development of rural

leadership: Problems, procedures, and insights. Battle Creek, MI: W. K. Kellogg Foundation.

Kaufman, E. K., & Carter, H. S. (2005). Agricultural leadership development:

From networking to application. Journal of Leadership Education, 4(2), 66-75.

Kaufman, E. K., Rateau, R. J., Ellis, K. C., Kasperbauer, H. J., & Stacklin, L. R.

(2010). Leadership program planning: Assessing the needs and interests of the agricultural community. Journal of Leadership Education, 9(1), 122-143.

Kelsey, K. D., & Wall, L. J. (2003). Do agricultural leadership programs produce

community leaders? A case study of the impact of an agricultural leadership program on participants' community involvement. Journal of

Agricultural Education, 44(4), 35-46. doi:10.5032/jae.2003.04035


137

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Lindquist, J. (n.d.). The International Association of Programs for Agricultural

Leadership [website]. Retrieved from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu/karl/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=58

Miller, H. L. (Ed.) (1976). The Kellogg Farmers Study Program: An experience

in rural leadership development. Battle Creek, MI: W. K. Kellogg Foundation.

Osborne, E. W. (Ed.) (n.d.). National research agenda: Agricultural education

and communication, 2007-2010. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida, Department of Agricultural Education and Communication.

Pope, L. S. (Ed.) (n.d.). General Guidelines of the International Association of

Programs for Agricultural Leaders (IAPAL). College Station, TX: IAPAL. Raelin, J. (2004). Don’t bother putting leadership into people. The Academy of

Management Executive, 19, 131-135. doi:10.5465/AME.2004.14776184 Riggio, R. (2008). Leadership development: The current state and future

expectations. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research,

60(4), 383-392. doi:10.1037/1065-9293.60.4.383 Ritch, S. W. (Ed.) (2010). Guiding questions: Guidelines for leadership education

programs. College Park, MD: International Leadership Association. Retrieved from http://www.ila-net.org/Communities/LC/GuidingQuestionsFinal.pdf

Ritch, S. W., & Mengel, T. (2009). Guiding questions: Guidelines for leadership

education programs. Journal of Leadership Education, 8(1), 216-227. Waldrum, J. (Ed.) (2009). International Association of Programs for Agricultural

Leadership (IAPAL) directory. Little Rock, AR: IAPAL.


138

Author Biographies

Eric K. Kaufman is an assistant professor in the Department of Agricultural and Extension Education at Virginia Tech, where he teaches leadership courses for student in all disciplines at the graduate and undergraduate levels. He coordinates Virginia Tech’s graduate certificate program in Collaborative Community Leadership and assists in coordination of the undergraduate Leadership and Social Change minor. Eric holds a Bachelor of Science degree from Ohio State University; both his Master’s and Doctorate of Philosophy degrees are from the University of Florida. Eric’s research interests include collegiate leadership education and leadership development with adults in community and volunteer settings. Richard J. Rateau is a recent Ph.D. graduate from Virginia Tech where he completed his doctoral program in the Department of Agricultural and Extension Education. At Virginia Tech he has taught undergraduate courses in communications and leadership. He recently completed a rewarding 30-year career in the poultry and red meat industries, working in various leadership, strategic planning, and management capacities. He earned an M.B.A. at Queens University and has a B.S. in Agricultural Sciences from Auburn University. His research interests include leadership development and employability skills of college graduates leading to success in the workplace. Hannah S. Carter is assistant professor in leadership development at the University of Florida in the Department of Agricultural Education and Communication. Within this appointment she directs a leadership development program for adults within private industry throughout Florida. In addition, she teaches courses in both the undergraduate and graduate level in organizational leadership and team leadership. She obtained her B.S. in environmental science with a concentration in biology at the University of Maine at Presque Isle. Her M.S. and Ph.D. are both in agricultural education and communication from the University of Florida. Her current research interests are in adult leadership programming including both program development and determining impacts of leadership programming.

L. Rochelle Strickland is a Public Service Assistant within the department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communication and is the Program Manager for LEAD21, a national leadership development program for faculty, specialists, program and team leaders, research station and center directors, district and regional directors, department heads and chairs, and others in land grant universities’ colleges of agricultural, environmental, and human sciences and USDA/NIFA. She plays a key role in the coordination of the development


139

and implementation of LEAD21. Dr. Strickland is currently developing an adult leadership development program for individuals involved in Virginia’s agricultural and natural resources industries. Her research focuses on evaluating the outcomes and impacts of adult leadership development programs, specifically within the agricultural context to understand best practices for adult education and leadership development.


140

First-Year Student Perceptions Related to Leadership

Awareness and Influences

Melissa R. Shehane

Department of Student Activities Texas A&M University

125 Koldus Student Services Building 1236 TAMU

College Station, TX 77843-1236 979-845-4878

[email protected]

Kathryn A. Sturtevant

Department of Student Activities Texas A&M University

125 Koldus Student Services Building 1236 TAMU


[email protected]

Lori L. Moore, Ph.D.


Texas A&M University 600 John Kimbrough Blvd., Room 224


[email protected]

Kim E. Dooley, Ph.D.

Professor and Associate Dean for Academic Operations College of Agriculture and Life Sciences

Texas A&M University 600 John Kimbrough Blvd., Ste 515


[email protected]


141

Abstract This study sought to explore first-year college student perceptions related to when they first became aware of leadership and perceived influences on leadership. The study was rooted in the Leadership Identity Development Model (Komives, Owen, Longerbeam, Mainella, & Osteen, 2005). Five purposively selected individuals completing the first semester of a formal leadership program for first-year students participated in this study. Content analysis of qualitative interviews revealed two themes related to leadership awareness: pre-college and positional versus non-positional roles; four themes related to perceived leadership influences: external role models, internal beliefs, previous experience, and types of leadership/leadership philosophy. This research supports the importance of both internal and external factors in developing an understanding of what leadership is by first-year college students.

Introduction

Institutional mission statements in higher education often state that developing leaders is a primary outcome of the college experience. Scholars believe that institutional missions will continue to highlight leadership as a key goal or outcome of the college experience (Astin & Astin, 2000; Boatman, 1999; McIntire, 1989). Therefore, student affairs administrators and leadership educators must continue to take this subject seriously and continue to research efforts that develop college student leadership capacities. Identifying the most successful ways to develop leadership capacities in college students is an ever evolving discussion among leadership educators. Roberts (2007) shared that multiple purposes, strategies, and populations need to be considered when developing leadership programs in order to create dynamic opportunities that meet the needs of a wide array of students. Various developmental techniques can enhance the student leadership experience. For example, create meaningful participatory experiences, examine current programs in light of multiple theories, and create opportunities for students to observe leaders as potential role models (Wagner, 2011). Knowing that leadership is interpreted differently from varying lenses and there is no overarching definition of leadership, one can see that leadership programs look different depending on numerous factors (Bass, 1990; Brungardt, 1996; Dugan, 2011). Thus, they are difficult to compare and measure against one another. However, through student leadership research, scholars have identified factors that have a high impact on student learning; for example, faculty mentoring, sociocultural discussions, community service, involvement, and formal leadership programs can typically promote the achievement of outcomes in leadership education (Dugan, 2011).


142

According to Dugan (2011), “formal leadership programs are intentionally designed learning opportunities focused on increasing college students’ leadership knowledge, skills, and values through an overarching set of experiences spanning multiple platforms of delivery” (p. 75). According to this broad definition, researchers typically report positive outcomes from participating in formal leadership programs (Cress, Astin, Zimmerman, & Burkhardt, 2001; Dugan, 2006; Komives, Longerbeam, Owen, Mainella, & Osteen, 2006). Results are not as straight forward in complex formal leadership programs, due to the difficulty in comparing programs that have inconsistent means of delivery (Dugan, 2011). Additional research highlights how formal leadership programs assist students in their development as leaders. In the study by Kezar and Moriarty (2000), Caucasian and African American women shared that they believed participation in formal leadership programs assisted in their leadership development. In another study (Cress et al., 2001), three characteristics of quality leadership programs emerged as directly impacting student development: opportunities for service, experiential activities (internships), and active learning through collaboration (group projects in class). Students involved in these programs were more likely to develop a sense of civic responsibility, meaning they learned the importance of participating in their community and helping others. Dugan (2006) shared that leadership programs may have a broader impact if the learning outcomes are focused on areas in which students need to improve upon rather than focused on too many variables. Considering the diversity of research on leadership development, Dugan’s broad definition of formal leadership programs was used to inform the study.

Theoretical Framework Over the years, numerous scholars have designed leadership theories and models that have been applied in the context of formal leadership programs (Bass, 1990; Komives, Lucas, & McMahon, 2007; Komives, Wagner, & Associates, 2009; Northouse, 2007; Roberts, 2007). The theoretical framework for this study was grounded in the Leadership Identity Development (LID) Model, which was nonexistent until 2005. Komives, Owen, Longerbeam, Mainella, and Osteen (2005) developed the LID Model to help understand stages of leadership development which students experience throughout their life. The LID is based on relational leadership as depicted by the Relational Leadership Model (RLM). According to the LID model, when a student progresses through stages of development the individual cultivates a deeper understanding of leadership, community, and self in relation to the world. A grounded theory approach


143

revealed a six stage process through which includes the following: awareness, exploration/engagement, leader identified, leadership differentiated, generativity, and internalization/synthesis. The awareness stage recognizes that leaders exist and students are inactive followers. Exploration and engagement result in students becoming involved and active followers. Students in the leader identified stage understand that leadership is positional. The generativity stage results in an active commitment to a larger purpose. Students in this stage began to invest in others and focus on sustaining their organization. The internalization and synthesis stage meant vigorous commitment and involvement with leadership as a daily course of action (Komives et al., 2005). The model explores how students visualize leadership identity as it relates to the relational leadership model. In addition to the stages mentioned above, group and developmental influences were essential in understanding how the individual changes across the stages of a central category. These influences included adult influences, peer influences, meaningful involvement, and reflective learning (Komives et al., 2007). The LID model helps one to identify stages of development and see his or her leadership growth over time (Komives et al., 2005, Komives et al., 2006). The model does have limitations. Students in the grounded theory held extensive organizational involvements on their campuses; thus, the data may appear differently with other types of students. Even though there are limitations, this model can serve as a beneficial aid in understanding the leadership development of students. Student development theory confirms that programs whose audience is in the same developmental stage are successful in the fact that they provide opportunities for community building, individual, and shared growth (Evans, Forney & Guido-DiBrito, 1998). Day, Harrison, and Haplin (2009) believe that there are numerous reasons why identity development should be incorporated in leader development. As the authors noted, “identity is important typically because it grounds individuals in understanding who they are, what are their major goals and aspirations, and what are their personal strengths and challenges” (Day et al., 2009, p. 64).

Purpose and Research Questions The purpose of this study, conducted as part of a larger study, was to explore perceptions of first-year college students related to their awareness of leadership and perceived leadership influences. More specifically, this study sought to create meaning and understanding of the perceptions of participants in the inaugural cohort of a leadership development program for first-year students about the awareness stage of the LID model in order to glean insight into how practitioners


144

may structure formal leadership programs. Understanding a student’s pre-college experiences prior to entering college will assist leadership educators when designing formal leadership programs in order to meet the students where they are at in their own development. This study was guided by the following research questions:

• How do students describe the first time they became aware of being involved in leadership?

• What factors do students believe influenced their leadership?

Methodology The formal leadership program included in the present study was intended for first-year, traditional aged, undergraduate students who are interested in enhancing their understanding of leadership and expanding their experiences. The purpose of the program was to provide undergraduate students at a Research I land-grant university the opportunity to engage in conversations and activities that will introduce them to leadership essentials, assist them in articulating their personal philosophy of leadership, and empower them to be aware, mindful and active leaders. This leadership development program was designed to address and support the needs of students as they grow throughout their career at the university and become more involved in local, national and global communities. With those concepts in mind, the guiding principles of the program were as follows: everyone has the capacity to lead, leadership is multifaceted, leadership is collaborative, leadership is a process, leadership strives to create positive change, and leadership strives to reach shared goals. The root of these guiding principles is for participants to focus on their own personal identity development. This study utilized a basic qualitative research approach (Merriam, 2009). Five participants in the previously described leadership program participated in this study. Participants were purposively selected by a member of the research team based on varying levels of leadership identity development. Specifically, two men and three women participated in face-to-face semi-structured interviews (Kvale, 1996) conducted to gain an understanding of the perceptions of program participants related to leadership identity development. Komives, Longerbeam, Mainella, Osteen, Owen and Wagner (2009) noted that “student interviews are exceptionally useful sources of data” (p. 28) when conducting qualitative leadership identity development studies. Each semi-structured interview lasted one hour. An interview guide was used during the interviews to help facilitate the sequence of topics addressed during the


145

interview (Kvale, 1996). The guide was adapted from interview questions developed and used by Komives et al. (2005). To ensure confidentiality, each participant was randomly assigned a pseudonym. The interviews were recorded on audio tapes. Following the completion of all interviews, the audio tapes were transcribed by a professional transcriptionist. Member checking was accomplished by requesting that participants review the interview transcripts and respond with any changes or additions. A peer debriefing was held with the entire research team prior to data analysis (Erlandson, Harris, Skipper, & Allen, 1993). Data were analyzed using inductive content analysis. “Content analysis is a technique that enables researchers to study human behavior in an inductive way through an analysis of their communications” (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2009, p. 472). According to Patton (2002), “content analysis, then, involves identifying, coding, categorizing, classifying, and labeling the primary patterns in the data” (p. 463). Data were coded using the three-phase coding process outlined by Glaser and Strauss (1967). In the first phase, the data were read and open codes were created. In the second phase, axial codes were assigned. Connections were made between the open codes to create categories. The units of data were reviewed again during this phase to ensure that the connections made with category codes still accurately represented the data. In the third phase, selective coding, categories were identified as those that repeated frequently and accounted for most of the data. These codes emerged as the major themes gleaned from the interviews. Trustworthiness was established in this study through, member checks, peer debriefings, and triangulation. Archival data, including applications completed by students to be selected for the program, and answers to reflection questions collected from weekly program sessions were used to triangulate the data collected in the interviews.

Findings

Research question one examined how students described the first time they became aware of being involved in leadership. Content analysis of the interview transcripts revealed two themes that emerged from this question: pre-college and positional versus non-positional roles. Pre-College

Pre-college experiences that influenced awareness of leadership were evident in the statements shared by the students. Students referenced elementary (Sarah, John), middle (Molly), and high school (Kate, Ben) experiences that were influential in their leadership awareness. Sarah reported first being aware of


146

leadership in the fourth grade while John remembers it from as far back as when he was “about to get promoted to be a Webelo” in Boy Scouts. Other students did not describe becoming aware of leadership until high school. Kate referred to her actually being in a leadership position within an organization in high school as the first time she really became aware of leadership. Similarly, another student said:

I guess the first time that I actually put label leadership on it was probably in high school, when my school started the Leadership program that they have…And they have a class, and you learn about leadership, and they were in groups, and we do leadership service projects and stuff like that. So that’s probably the first time that I ever associated leadership with anything that I did. (Ben)

Positional versus Non-Positional

Positional versus non-positional leadership roles were also identified in the statements that the students shared. Again, some students clearly associated leadership with positions within organizations. For example, one student stated:

I was first involved in Student Council and that was like my first taste of leadership, and it was like the whole process of running and getting elected by peers and that was like… I was elected and that made me a leader to them. (Molly)

Similarly, as noted in the pre-college section, Kate described becoming aware of leadership when she was actually in a leadership position within the DECA organization. John was also able to recognize non-positional leadership roles:

I had no idea what to do but on television that night there was a movie called Gandhi on. I saw that and I was all pumped up and inspired by this guy who like made social change and what not and my dad explained just how much that meant to our culture and our background, so I'm like okay I've got to do something with Gandhi in it and I didn't know where to start but what ended up happening I saw just a small thing where I did a fundraiser and I funded for to sell books to go to India less fortunate schools and it worked out pretty well. We continued to it until out of the area but you know the leadership portion was that my dad refused to do anything with it. (John)

Within the quote above, John clearly articulated a component of the Awareness stage of the LID model by describing when he first recognized the ability of


147

others to lead and influence those around them. Another student was also able to describe being a leader as more relational, rather than positional manner from an early age as she described an experience from when she was in the fourth grade. According to her:

We, as a class, we went to a first grade classroom and helped, we were each paired up with a first grade student and we would help them with their reading and writing and spelling stuff like that, for like a half hour each week, I think it was. I think that was the first time that I really felt like I was a leader just working one on one with the student, helping them to learn. (Sarah)

Findings showed that first-year students in this program came into the program with at least an understanding of leadership from a positional perspective. In other words, they were perhaps most aware of leadership because they had served in what they defined as a leadership position. While two themes emerged from the research question related to when participants first became aware of leadership, it is evident the two are interrelated. While all participants were aware of leadership prior to coming to college, when they first recall being aware of leadership was different for each participant. It appeared as though school and outside activities at various times in their lives played a role in triggering their awareness of leadership. Furthermore, it was because of some of these activities and experiences that participants became aware of leadership as being either positional or non-positional. The second research question explored factors influencing the leadership of participants. Four themes emerged from the content analysis of the interview transcripts: external role models, previous experience, internal beliefs, and types of leadership/leadership philosophy. External Role Models

Students noted the impact of external role models, such as teachers and other family members, on their conceptualization of leadership. Many of the participants shared something related to the influence an older adult. John referenced the presence of an adult family friend as an influence by stating, “I would see my dad's best friend was a lawyer and I would really looked up to him.” Other students described the influence of an older adult more in depth. One student noted the influence of her parents and teachers as an influence to how she first started to think about leadership. She commented:

I think that came from watching my teachers in the classroom, as well as my parents just doing their job….They worked at [University] and so I


148

would often be with them at night programs or on the weekends when they were here, and I would watch them lead students and other faculty. (Sarah)

The external roles models identified were not always significantly older. One student noted the influence of a sibling. She shared:

I have a brother like he has really been an influence because he’s like the first person that like I really looked up to and saw him develop as a leader because we were both in the same [organization]. He was in it a couple of years before me of course, and I was able to see him grow and I was able to like kind of look at that and see how to better develop my leadership skills. (Molly)

It was evident that students were able to identify role models who had either directly or indirectly influenced their leadership. Previous Experience

When discussing their previous experiences, students stated experiences involving coordinating events and holding a position. For example:

I definitely learned more about taking action and like actually being responsible for myself and my own actions and kind of like organize my own program, and get it set up and completed. Like I set up my own [event]. (Molly)

In addition, Ben stated:

Because I was a senior, I got to lead over all the freshmen, sophomore and juniors who were in the class with me. And then also my basketball coach is kind like, or was for a while, like the chaplain of our school. So he takes all the grads or at least the middle school grads on little retreats and he asked me to be a senior leader of the eighth grade retreat. I got to do that and that was I guess that was one of the first times that I was actually like put in charge of a little group, so I had like thirteen eighth graders that I was in charge of and there's like five other senior leaders with me so it was cool. It was like the first time I was actually like a counselor of students and stuff like that, like by myself and not with another adult. (Ben)

Students who shared the most about previous experience tied such experiences to positional views of leadership. In essence, these students needed the opportunity to be directly involved with leadership as they considered what had the most influence over their leadership.


149

Internal Beliefs

Students shared work ethic, morals and values, ethics and religion as factors that influenced their leadership. Participants described how these factors act as a guide for how they make decisions. Molly focused on work ethic being a driving influence and stated, “I like to get things done and I will not rest until like things are done and so that like affects my leadership, because I'm just like very proactive.” Another student focused on how morals and values influenced her leadership:

I guess my morals and my values… really influence my leadership. Like I'm not going to do anything or I'm not going to tell people to do anything that goes against them. That's just something like I'm so like strict in those, like I won't change anything and so then like I don't know, I just have like this desire to make sure that everything goes like we said. (Kate)

One student connected morals and values to religion. Specifically, Ben shared the he “definitely have those morals and standards and there's a lot of leadership example in Christianity.” He went on to describe the influence of his religion and shared:

I think it helps me in the long run make better decisions about what I want to do and about how I want to treat situations that I guess I could possible get into, so it gives me a basis for making decisions, stuff like that. So it helps in that area. I guess I mean it gives me an overall reason to be a leader, because I don't know, if I didn't have my faith and my religion to believe in. I don't think I would necessarily have as much of a purpose to be an active leader in life so to put it generally like that. (Ben)

Another student also focused heavily on how religion had been a major influence on leadership. She noted:

My faith, my religion, I'm Catholic and like mostly it's based on my Catholic principles and stuff. I mean and just kind of like life, and what my mom has taught me, my conscience, you know… sometimes something will happen and I'll be like oh, I don't like that, we're not going to do that again. (Kate)

Overall, the students’ belief systems played a critical role in how they viewed not only themselves, but leadership as well.


150

Types of Leadership/Leadership Philosophy

How participants viewed, and in essence framed their view of leadership, also influenced their personal leadership. Three types of leadership emerged from the conversations with students. Some participants clearly identified leadership as being positionally focused, servant minded, or management-oriented. Sarah shared quotes related to two differing paradigms. First, Sarah found that leadership was positional and stated:

I think everybody has to work together, but I do believe that there has to be somebody up at the top, and then there down, and then each person is like of a head of their own thing and they all have to work together. (Sarah)

While Sarah shared a positional stance initially, she also found that leadership can be servant minded as well:

Another thing about me is that I love to watch other people be successful, and so I've found that in leadership I make sure that what I'm doing helps them be successful because then I get satisfaction out of that. (Sarah)

Kate saw leadership as management-oriented and highlighted how she took the lead on a group project, assigned tasks based on skill sets, and gathered all the materials prior to the due date. Kate found satisfaction from this management approach and shared, “That was actually a really good group.” Overall, students seemed to have varying, if not multiple, leadership philosophies. In different situations, these students may view leadership and what has influenced their leadership differently. When examining the four themes related factors influencing the leadership of participants, it appears as two were internal factors and two were external factors. The beliefs participants had about such factors as work ethic, morals and values, and religion and the views they held related to types of leadership and leadership philosophies were internal factors influencing their leadership. The influence of other individuals and what they learned from previous experiences were external factors influencing their leadership.

Conclusions and Implications

It is clear that the leadership awareness and perceptions of first-year college students is complex. Students in this study identified internal and external factors


151

that helped shape their views. Additional research is needed to dissect how these pre-college involvements and realities impact students’ experience in a formal leadership program. Such research will help practitioners as they develop leadership programs that challenge students to reflect on their past experiences and help them make connections as to how those experiences have the potential to shape their future. Our primary focus in this study was to investigate the initial stage of the Leadership Identity Development Model. Focusing on the Awareness stage provided insight and several implications for student affairs and leadership education research and practice. First, as researchers and practitioners, it is essential that we facilitate conversations with students about their experiences before college. It is evident that students bring to college their previous experiences that helped shape their current worldview, including views and awareness of leadership (Dugan, 2011). When students enter a formal leadership program, encouraging reflection of their pre-college experiences of leadership can be beneficial. Kolb (1984) discussed reflection of concrete experiences and how that process impacts the learning experience. Knowledge of the four types of experiences and learning styles will not only help students in their leadership development, but in other academic settings. As educators, it is our role to provide a venue for students to explore connections between their leadership experiences within a formal leadership program and their academic experiences in the classroom. For instance, if an overwhelming amount of students identify their early views of leadership as having to hold a position, it would be a pivotal learning moment to challenge students as to why they believe this to be true. This can foster rich discussion that could prompt future conversations as well as encourage students to think critically. Formal leadership programs should have a solidified curriculum with student learning and development outcomes (Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education [CAS], 2009). While reflection of pre-college experiences is not an articulated outcome, reflection aids in a student’s “understanding of self” and can help identify why they wanted to be a part of a formal leadership program. Understanding the reasons behind active student participation can impact investment and retention. Just as Dugan (2011) stated, “educators should first begin with critical self-reflection regarding their developmental preparedness” (p. 78), educators also need to challenge students to self-reflect on their experiences prior to entering the leadership program as to gauge their preparedness of actively contributing to the program. Self-reflection of pre-college experiences can be a powerful tool in helping students and educators gain momentum in creating healthy discourse around leadership.


152

Second, students’ discussion of internal beliefs as depicted in Question 2 indicates the need for continued integration of personal development within formal leadership programs. Some elements of personal development represented in Question 2, such as morals, values, spiritual development and ethics, are foundational components reflected in vital student affairs literature, such as Learning Reconsidered (NASPA/ACPA, 2004) and CAS (2009), as well as significant leadership models, such as the Social Change Model and the Relational Leadership Model (Komives et al., 2007; Komives, Wagner, et al., 2009). Student’s awareness and growth in these areas are connected to their awareness and growth in leadership, and some might say development in one area is essential for development in the other. Komives et al. (2011) shared several examples of activities, discussion topics, course material, and suggested readings that centers around personal development of students within a leadership program, thus reinforcing the concept that personal and leadership development are integrated. Finally, further discussion of the role others play in student’s leadership journey is also needed. Komives et. al. (2005) stated “adults were very important in building confidence and being an early building block of support” (p. 596). Students in this study indicate family members, family friends, and a coach as individuals who have influenced their awareness of leadership. Encouraging students to continue to reflect on external relationships that have an influence on their views of leadership can be valuable, specifically in creating supportive mentoring relationships throughout their academic career. These discussions could foster their view of self with others from dependent to interdependent. It is recommended that research efforts continue to explore first-year college students’ awareness of leadership and perceived leadership influences. In order to more fully understand the leadership identity development of a diverse student population, future studies should include a larger number of students with more diverse backgrounds and experiences. Through this study, it is evident that some college students’ perceptions of leadership are shaped from their experiences with individuals affiliated with their high school education. It is a recommendation that leadership educators form stronger relationships with high school personnel who have direct, co-curricular relationships with students in an effort to better understand the high school experience. Gaining a better perspective of the pre-college experiences of first year students from an administrator point of view could strengthen the design, structure and success of formal leadership programs. Finally, while focusing on just one stage of the LID model provided the opportunity to explore student’s perceptions at a deeper level, it is recommended that future research incorporate all stages.


153

References

Astin, A., & Astin, H. (2000). Leadership reconsidered: Engaging higher

education in social change. Battle Creek, MI: W. K. Kellogg Foundation. Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: Theory, research,

& managerial applications (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press. Boatman, S. (1999). The leadership audit: A process to enhance the development

of student leadership. NASPA Journal, 37(1), 325-336. Burghardt, C. (1996). The making of leaders: A review of the research in

leadership development and education. The Journal of Leadership Studies,

3(3), 81-95. Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (2006). CAS

professional standards for higher education (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Cress, C. M., Astin, H. S., Zimmerman, K., & Burkhardt, J. C. (2001).

Developmental outcomes of college students’ involvement in leadership activities. Journal of College Student Development, 42(1), 15-27.

Day, D. V., Harrison, M. M., & Halpin, S. M. (2009). An integrative approach to

leader development: Connecting adult development, identity, and

expertise. New York: Psychology Press. Dugan, J. P. (2006). Involvement and leadership: A descriptive analysis of

socially responsible leadership. Journal of College Student Development, 47(3), 335-343.

Dugan, J. P. (2011). Research on college student leadership development. In S.R.

Komives, J. P. Dugan, J. E. Owen, C. Slack, W. Wagner, & Associates (Eds.), The handbook for student leadership development (2nd ed., pp. 59-84). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Erlandson, D. A., Harris, E. L., Skipper, B. L., & Allen, S. D. (1993). Doing

naturalistic inquiry: A guide to methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Evans, N., Forney, D. S., & Guido-DiBrito, F. (1998). Student development in

college: Theory, research and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


154

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2009). How to design and evaluate research in

education (7th ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill Higher Education. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies

for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. Kezar, A., & Moriarty, D. (2000). Expanding our understanding of student

leadership development: A study exploring gender and ethnic identity. Journal of College Student Development, 41(1), 55-69.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning

and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Komives, S. R., Dugan, J. P., Owen, J. E., Slack, C., Wagner, W., & Associates.

(2011). The handbook for student leadership development (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Komives, S. R., Longerbeam, S. D., Mainella, F., Osteen, L., Owen, J. E., &


Komives, S. R., Longerbeam, S. D., Owen, J. E., Mainella, F. C., & Osteen, L.

(2006). A leadership identity development model: Applications from a grounded theory. Journal of College Student Development, 47(4), 401-418.





College Student Development, 46(6), 593-611. Komives, S. R., Wagner, W., & Associates. (2009). Leadership for a better

world: Understanding the social change model of leadership development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. McIntire, D. (1989). Student leadership development: A student affairs mandate.

NASPA Journal, 27, 75-79.


155

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and

implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. National Association of Student Personnel Administrators and American College

Personnel Association (2004). Learning reconsidered: A campus-wide

focus on the student experience. Washington, DC: Author. Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership: Theory and practice (3rd ed.). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluations methods (3rd ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Roberts, D. C. (2007). Deeper learning in leadership: Helping college students

find potential within. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Wagner, W. (2011). Considerations of Student Development in Leadership. In

S.R. Komives, J.P. Dugan, J. E. Owen, C. Slack, W. Wagner, & Associates (Eds.), The handbook for student leadership development (2nd ed., pp. 85-107). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


156

Author Biographies Melissa Shehane serves as Senior Advisor in the Leadership and Service Center at Texas A&M University. Melissa coordinates community engagement and service-learning efforts with faculty and other stakeholders. Her primary focus is developing civically minded leaders. She is pursuing a doctorate. in Agricultural Leadership, Education, and Communications at Texas A&M University. Kathryn Sturtevant serves as an Advisor in the Leadership and Service Center at Texas A&M University. Kathryn coordinates leadership programming, advises two student organizations, and is involved with committees that support and implement assessment and social justice initiatives. Lori L. Moore is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communications at Texas A&M University. She received her bachelor and master’s from Texas A&M University and her doctorate from the University of Florida. From 2003 to 2008, Dr. Moore was on the faculty at the University of Idaho. At Texas A&M she teaches courses in introductory leadership, leadership theory, adult education, and is the co-coordinator of the Freshman Leadership Living-Learning Community. Dr. Moore’s research focuses on leadership pedagogy and assessing the impact of leadership learning communities. Dr. Kim E. Dooley is the Associate Dean for Academic Operations for the College of Agriculture and Life Science and Professor in the Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communications at Texas A&M University. She received her doctorate in 1995, masters in education in 1987, and bachelor of science in 1984 from Texas A&M University. She has conducted professional presentations and training programs around the globe. Her publications include over 50 refereed journal articles and a book titled, Advanced Methods in Distance

Education: Applications and Practices for Educators, Administrators, and

Learners. Her research interests include faculty professional development and course conversion into eLearning formats, educational technology as a tool to improve teaching and learning, program development and evaluation, inquiry-based learning and assessment, and qualitative research methodology.


157

Professor as Facilitator: Shaping an Emerging, Living

System of Shared Leadership in the Classroom

David S. Bright, Ph.D.

Associate Professor Wright State University

Department of Management 3640 Colonel Glenn Highway

Dayton, OH 45435 (937) 619-9005

[email protected]

Elizabeth Fisher Turesky, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor Leadership and Organizational Studies

University of Southern Maine Lewiston-Auburn College

51 Westminster Street Lewiston, ME 04240

(207) 753-6066 [email protected]

Roger Putzel, Ph.D.

Associate Professor Business Administration

St. Michael’s College Colchester, VT 05439-0211


Thomas Stang

Wright State University Department of Management

3640 Colonel Glenn Highway Dayton, OH 45435



158

Abstract

From the perspective of emergence, professors can facilitate and shape a class as a complex, adaptive, and living system. A case study illustrates phases of emergence in the classroom by tracing how a professor may use this perspective to empower students to share in the leadership of the classroom. Instead of presenting lessons, the professor facilitates emergent activity, creating a classroom structure where students practice leadership behaviors. In this classroom structure, the professor assumes the leadership roles of coach and facilitator. As a result students building the classroom culture together they connect with each other: they develop strong relationships, take initiative, and learn important lessons about leadership. This article concludes with design principles for establishing a classroom of shared leadership in any teaching environment in any subject.

Introduction

In recent decades several critics (Wisnewski, 2010; Aram & Noble, 1999; McAndrew, 1997; Rifkin, 1980) of traditional classroom pedagogy have urged educators to embrace learner-centric teaching, where the professor shifts from a top-down, hierarchical command-and-control instructor to a facilitator, acting as coach, consultant, and gardener. Does allowing a class culture to emerge engage the students? How might a professor facilitate this emergence during different phases of the class? Axley and McMahon (2006) describe the classroom as a system; we focus on three of their systemic elements emergence, connections, and feedback loops.

Emergence in the Classroom

“Emergence” refers to novelty in a system’s form or function (Bunge, 2003; Goldstein, 1999). For Bunge (2003) “self-arranging” or organizing among students manifests such novelty. From the “bottom-up,” individuals reacting to local stimuli assemble an elegant, system-level pattern (Bunge, 2003; Bedau, 1997). Several literatures explore people’s capacity for emergent organizing. In organization development (OD) bottom-up processes generate informal order in organizational life (Burnes, 2005; Weick, 2000) and are found in T-groups, gestalt theory and emergent leadership (Highhouse, 2002; Martinez, 2010). In addition, several applied OD practices assume that people will generate order (e.g., Olson & Eoyang, 2001; Owen, 2008). For many years OD has viewed organizations as complex and adaptive rather than mechanistic and linear systems (Bushe & Marshak, 2009).


159

Emergence is a common theme in several strands of complexity science. Axley and McMahon (2006) refer to complex adaptive systems models, network organizations, non-equilibrium and chaos theory, as do many others (Anderson, 1999; Black & Edwards, 2000; Goldstein, 1999; Kauffman, 1995; Mathews, White, & Long, 1999; Waldrop, 1992). Emergence always refers to a new state of an individual, group, organization - or classroom. Yet ideas about emergence have barely influenced pedagogy. In our experience most professors still operate hierarchically, expecting students to follow instructions. For Robinson (2010) our educational system is implicitly designed to suppress creativity in the service of a linear, industrialist paradigm for the convenience and control of the professor. Professors may help a more complex and fulfilling system emerge in the classroom. In such an environment, in classes characterized by connectedness and feedback loops, students may develop greater awareness about themselves and about complex organizations (Axley & McMahon, 2006). Connectedness is the configuration of relationships between agents in a system. Highly functioning organizations require a high level of connectedness (Dutton & Heaphy, 2003). People may form connections when confronted with chaos or ambiguity (Blatt, 2006). Students connect when assignments require self-organization. According to systems theorists (e.g., Katz & Kahn, 1978; Burke, 2002; Axley & McMahon, 2006) positive or amplifying feedback loops provide energy and direction to the activities of interacting agents. For instance, students who experiment inspire their peers and set patterns for classroom interaction. Conversely, negative feedback loops (e.g., “damping feedback,” Axley & McMahon, 2006, 305) restrict experimentation. Adaptive organizations flirt with chaos (Pascale, Milleman, & Gioja, 2001), but negative feedback keeps them from going too far. When connectedness and feedback loops emerge, a system becomes adaptive and can reshape itself indefinitely and perhaps independently (Livne-Tarandach & Bartunek, 2009). Just as fireflies begin flashing in harmony (Radio Lab, 2003); students may synchronize their behaviors and interests. Rather than looking to the professor for leadership and direction, students have their own ideas and take initiative; they gain understanding of themselves and their systems environment; they learn to lead (Komives, Owen, Longerbeam, Mainella, & Osteen, 2005).

Facilitation and Emergence

How can the professor facilitate the emergence of student organizing? Let us compare the facilitator to a gardener. A gardener sets artificial structures that affect plants: soil condition, seed selection, watering patterns, and so forth. Only the plants, however,


160

can grow. Foliage emerges under the right conditions; the gardener shapes emergence toward a desired outcome. For instance, with some crops (e.g., peas or grapes), the gardener installs a trellis that shapes but does not determine the pattern of growth. On one trellis leaves form unique patterns each year. Similarly, the professor can set formal conditions for learning: the arrangement of the physical space, the enactment of class routines, and opportunities for student initiative. Students enact a classroom reality in response to these conditions. The professor provides a framework but cannot force students to learn. An initial class template becomes the trellis upon which learning grows. Teachers interested in creating an emergent learning system may give up some control over the behavior and activities of students – admittedly a terrifying prospect for many professors; hence questions arise.

Question 1: How do connectedness and feedback loops develop in a

classroom?

Question 2: How can a facilitator foster connectedness and feedback loops in

a classroom?

Methodology We used a qualitative case study approach in the action research tradition, where colleagues systematically examine their own experiences (Reason & Bradbury, 2001). As professors we examine materials, experiences, and outputs from emergent classes.

Case Selection

We studied classrooms where students and the professor share leadership in the context of studying organizational behavior and management, though our conclusions may well apply to classes on other topics. The organizational behavior courses taught by the authors of this paper depart from the hierarchical classroom approach. The shared leadership approach includes several common elements. For example, the professor eliminates rows of tables and chairs before the first class. As the course begins, the professor tells the students that they “will learn by doing, reflecting, analyzing and experimenting with new behaviors in a safe environment that is a departure from the traditional and familiar classroom experience.” Short lectures, students are told, will either be given in class or posted online, with the professor acting as a guide and facilitator. Students receive a syllabus detailing assignments and required reading that provide structure and organization to the


161

course, but students and the professor must work out how the classroom will function. Course, group and individual expectations, goals and outcomes are shared and clarified, and many questions are answered by the professor during classes the first week, as students grapple with their learner-centered role in this non-traditional classroom. After grasping this role, students share information, distribute responsibility, motivate each other, and take part in leading the class. Organizational behavior as a course topic provides an appropriate context for the study of facilitation for several reasons. First, the course covers topics that apply to emergence: leadership, organizational dynamics, conflict management, communicating effectively, power, influence and team development. In teams students practice skills, observe, analyze, and experiment with behavior, give and receive constructive feedback from their peers, and present a project. The structure of the classroom requires students to engage in self-organizing; students assume differentiated roles and responsibilities within their teams. Students choose to present on the topics covered and evaluate one another at the beginning, in the middle and at the end of the course. The class experience generates data that the students may gather, compile, and interpret in a final paper. Data Collection

Our data collection strategy provided a diversity of perspectives to ensure a credible and dependable representation of professor and student experiences (Yin, 2009). Three sources were examined. First, the course syllabus and manual for a particular collaborative class design provided background on the expectations for students, and assumptions about the role of the professor. Second, ten hours of interviews with an exemplar instructor for this course explored perspectives about facilitation at different points of the class. Questions included: “What patterns do you observe in this phase of the class?” “What are the students’ reactions?” “What developments do you expect?” and “What do you do to facilitate the emergence of these developments?” The responses were transcribed in detail. Third, to represent the students’ perspectives, we drew a sample of 60 from 160 student memos written in two sections of this exemplary teacher’s class. In these memos, students wrote their goals, observations, and insights about class events the preceding week, personal lessons learned, and their goals for the next week, thus proving, a snapshot into the student experience at a particular moment. These required weekly memos were written for and judged by peers. The partially randomized selection provided a representative sample on student experiences.


162

Data Analysis

The analysis followed several steps to ensure confirmability of our data interpretation. First, the authors organized their observations to correspond with the early, middle, and late phases of the class. The data were entered into Atlas-ti, used to manage all analysis and results. Second, following Boyatzis (1998), the student author read and conducted open-coding (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) on the data to generate an initial list of themes. In particular, we were looking for (a) the conditions for emergence (e.g., the appearance of connectedness and feedback loops), (b) the student experience as emergence occurred, and (c) the facilitator’s role and actions during each phase. Third, the remaining authors discussed and sorted the open codes into thematic clusters (Boyatzis, 1998) that describe system developments in all our similarly framed classrooms when we function as facilitators. Each coded quotation was reviewed until the author team reached consensus on each theme and its interpretation. Fourth, these themes were arranged on a timeline, as indicated in Table 1, with the essential activities and indicators shown. Finally, we used the themes to again interpret original data to verify that the results were replicable.

Results Early Phase

Students’ reactions to the prospect of a non-traditional, learner-centered course range from disbelief to fear to positive anticipation. The early phase is characterized by stuctural divergence, an anxious emotional climate, and underdeveloped patterns of feedback. The prfessor focuses on shaping emergent structures, nurturing a supportive emotional climate and building students’ self-confidence. Table 1 illustrates the emerging states in a classroom and how the professors facilitate the classroom through each stage. The table depicts themes at each phase. The professors’ comments come from our discussions; student papers are cited directly (albeit anonymously).


163

Table 1 Emergent Developments and Facilitation Activities in the Shared Leadership Designed Classroom

Phase Emergent Developments Facilitation Activities

Early Structural divergence:

• Initiation of connections; students become acquainted.

• Structures and assignments presented for students to practice and share leadership. Emergence of initial informal structure as they do.

• Experimentation to accomplish goals. Lots of questions and trial and error.

Anxious Emotional Climate:

• Many students express discomfort with ambiguity and expectation for students sharing responsibility for the learning in the classroom.

• Testing of instructor expectations. To resolve ambiguity students ask for direction.

• Demonstration of relief and excitement at initial successes.

Underdeveloped Patterns of Feedback:

• Hesitance to talk authentically about feelings and perceptions; peer-to-peer feedback is almost all positive but pro

forma.

• Students concerned about how peers perceive them, don’t want “to look stupid.”

Shape Emergent Structures:

• Signal that class will operate under different assumptions from what students are used to (e.g., change physical arrangement of classroom).

• Lay out a formal structure, with differentiated roles, for students to build their emergent system on.

• Clarify assignments, expectations and goals as soon as possible.

Nurture a Supportive Emotional Climate:

• Create conditions for student-to-student coaching and peer feedback.

• Express confidence that they will achieve their goals.

• Show students that you care about them.

• Be patient. Emergence takes time. Build Confidence:

• Be generous with constructive and supportive feedback to students.

• Model active listening and effective feedback.

• Honor expression of all feelings, positive and negative.

• Honor mistakes. Be unflappable when things go awry.

• Help students to identify, express, and develop their leadership strengths.

• Have fun.


164

Middle Structural Stability

• Emergence of leadership behaviors among students.

• The system matures; routines taken for granted.

• Anxiety and confusion gives way to positive engagement.

Deepened Capacity for Feedback

• Constructive feedback becomes a valuable asset.

• Students apply leadership concepts when providing feedback to their teammates.

Growing Awareness of Self Within a System of Relationships

• Deepening knowledge of how the system works.

• Norms emerge norms named earlier phase acknowledged and reinforced.

• Startling discovery: when initiating leadership behaviors, I can influence others and the system.

Reinforce the New Formal Structure

• Hold students accountable for the their own learning and collective learning in the class.

• Facilitate team and leadership development and model the leadership to do so.

Foster Authenticity

• Encourage students to say what they think/feel. Facilitate trust building.

• Use student-to-student feedback to open up discussions about meeting expectations of self and others.

• Encourage students to support each other to take risks to try new leadership behaviors.

Facilitate Self-discovery

• Keep appropriate levels of tension in the class to allow students to stretch themselves.

• Continue to coach and give feedback to students.

Reinforce and celebrate self-discovery.

Late Convergence in Task, Process and relationship

• Convergence in the use of leadership jargon to explain theory to practice in the classroom and in connection with one’s work and life experiences.

• Concepts used to describe events and developments in the classroom as a laboratory for learning about leadership.

High Quality Relationships

• Peer pressure and support for one another brings out the best in everyone.

• Asking one another for significant personal feedback.

• Peer coaching. Awareness of Transcendent Impacts

• Papers that are peer reviewed describe learning beyond the course.

• Recognition of how I react to others.

• Deepened but detached appreciation of own strengths, weaknesses.

Encourage Reflection and Perspective-taking

• Debrief classroom experience. How did individually and collectively did students achieve goals? What was your experience over the semester?

• Students interview one another.

• Students pushed to become self-reflective. How far have I come? Have my goals and attitudes changed? What do I learn next? How have I and do I apply what I learned in this course to the organization where I work now or will work in the future?

Allow the Momentum to Reach Its Natural End

• Success = enthusiastic engagement in learning activities.

• Professor steps forward to coach students in reflecting deeply to find the personal meaning in their experiences over the course of the semester.

At first, students frequently use terms such as “confusion” and “anxiety,” indicating an anxious emotional climate. They are uncomfortable with the ambiguity of the class and apprehensive at taking responsibility for activities in class, such as in student-led discussions, leading their team in an experiential


165

exercise, giving each other feedback, and presenting course content to the entire class or to their team. In the face of this initial anxiety, the professor works to establish a supportive climate by demonstrating passion for students’ learning and by expressing confidence that the students will find their way. As in any normal class, students turn to the instructor for direction. Like coaches, a professor responds to anxiety by expressing confidence in students’ abilities. The professor shares resources and helps to clarify students’ understanding of how they will learn (by doing). The professor does not provide too much direction, which at this stage would undermine the class as it (unconsciously) seeks leadership within itself. The professor allows students to work their way through anxiety and confusion, noting that students learn at the edge of their comfort zone. In the vocabulary of complexity, we expect a novel, informal organization to emerge. The professor thus shapes emergent structures by setting the initial conditions and encouraging students to develop their own patterns of activity. Key facilitative actions include telling students that the class will be a new kind of experience, clarifying expectations, assignments, course and individual goals, and coaching students as they engage in the work of the classroom—learning about organizational behavior and leadership. For instance, the professor rearranges the physical space of the classroom. “The physical message right away is that this is not going to look like another classroom.” The professor does other things to signal that this course will be different. They devote class time for students to discuss and share their expectations and learning needs in small groups and then with all present. To reduce dependence and to release emergent energy, they encourage their students to take initiative, to take risks. When students think and act beyond assignments and grades for the class, the authors believe that they have developed commitment to the their own learning and to that of their peers. As students show evidence of awareness, responsibility, and commitment, they go beyond their original assumptions about what can be learned in the classroom about themselves and others. Students have new, hence emergent, experiences in relationships with peers and their professor. Structural divergence occurs at the next stage, as students engage in new classroom activities. Students demonstrate new classroom behavior as they join with their peers to complete team projects and engage in activities, simulations and assignments. Early on they make mistakes. Students must feel free to experiment with new ideas and ways of leading in order to learn to identify and correct mistakes as well as to overcome their fear of making them. A new classroom organizational structure emerges when students learn from experience which actions succeed, which fail, and which can be improved upon. Evidence of divergence is also found in the students’ stated desire to connect with their peers, to learn who they are and what they do. Students express interest in learning not


166

only more about one another as individuals, but also in the benefit of learning from one another. In so doing atudents link theory with the practice of leadership and organizational behavior. During this early phase an underdeveloped pattern of feedback prevails in the class. Students feel frustrated, embarrassed, inadequate, or insecure; they struggle to fulfill responsibilities and achieve their goals. They have difficulty sharing authentic information. So the professors reinforce students’ self-confidence by expressing confidence that the students will succeed and by instituting procedures that give students experience and, thereby, an increased sense of certainty. After presentations, discussions or experiential activities, peer reviews and other constructive feedback help shift the students’ mindset towards self-efficacy, confidence and autonomy. By the end of the early phase, students have presented to the class, led a discussion, facilitated a team exercise, given and received specific, constructive feedback, and reflected upon and discussed perceived successes and failures. They have some experience. Now they express relief and excitement about the classroom undertaking. The professors celebrate these moments as success but more importantly as appreciation and validation of where students are at that moment. Whether feeling fear, stress, or excitement, students are engaged with the enterprise. The professor’s actions plant the seeds of psychological safety (Edmondson, 1999), important classroom leadership by students, and a culture where people venture out of their comfort zone. Middle Phase

Table 1 depicts three developments in the middle stage: structural stability, enhanced feedback and security within a system of relationships. As these features emerge, the professor reinforces emergent classroom structures. The professor promotes innovation, authenticity, and self-discovery. In one instance, students insincerely praised a seriously flawed presentation. The professor, after referring to an obviously substandard presentation, strongly challenged the critics to be honest. Students report that the next round of feedback is sharper, more specific and effective. Such facilitation generates structural stability, as new classroom norms develop. Informal leadership emerges as class members routinely play more active roles than in traditionally taught courses. Students look to one another for significant feedback within the safe structure of their classroom. Leadership is not only informal but also shared. Despite formal team boundaries, people communicate across the class, solving problems and making decisions. Now familiar with peers,


167

professor, roles, and classroom procedures, students come to class expecting interaction that matters. As students grasp key concepts and become comfortable working in a nontraditional and highly interactive classroom, a positive, supportive environment forms. Psychological safety matures, as evidenced by the frequency and candor of peer feedback. Students understand why they are evaluated and participate in the process. Students report that the polite and positive feedback of the early phase has been supplanted by feedback that hits hard, but does not threaten. Watching the class structure stabilize, students see how a system works, how the environment shifts, how they fit in, and how the patterns reflect theory. From their observation emerges an awareness of self within a system of relationships and how people – they - influence the organization. Opportunities arise for professors to facilitate self-discovery. Organization emerges at the edge of chaos (Axley & McMahon, 2006; Pascale, Milleman, & Gioja, 2001). Self-discovery occurs as students give and receive feedback and understand their own feelings and those of others. For students to learn important lessons about themselves, the classroom needs “safe tension” – an environment where people share candid information, fearing neither failure nor retribution. At this stage the professor redirects attention away from procedural issues towards students’ personal development and leadership agendas. Late Phase

As the last row of Table 1 shows, the late stage of system development features convergence of task processes, high quality relationships, and awareness of transcendent effects. Student behaviors, interactions, and outcomes are consistent and self-sustaining. For example, students come to class ready to conduct an entire session of class with apparent ease. Students interact with consistency: they make requests of one another, report to one another, and provide one another with constructive feedback. In short, the class exhibits a stable organizational form. Relationships have reached a highly developed state. Students rely upon their peers and influence each other with little hesitation. Rather than disappoint their peers, many students exceed their own expectations. Norms about honesty and self-improvement govern student behaviors. At this stage, students accept and encourage peer-to-peer coaching. They see each other’s strengths and weaknesses and encourage one another to improve.


168

Finally, an awareness of transcendent impacts emerges as students discern and understand processes of an organization. Students develop a deeper understanding about how organizational systems actually operate, including how the parts and the whole work together. They see themselves in a different light, having exerted influence within the system. With this new self-awareness comes greater confidence in exercising leadership. Note for instance, this student’s statement: “I had never thought in a million years that I would be so passionate about a class and have confidence in myself to stand up and address a full class of students … This experience is one that will stay with me forever… I still reminisce in awe that I was so self-assured.” As the class reaches its conclusion, students also report that discoveries and lessons learned have created changes beyond the classroom. One student wrote the following: “Being able to present myself in a positive and professional manner on a more consistent basis is going to have to be a personal goal of mine for years to come. Furthermore, I am glad that I was able to have this experience because … it was extremely rewarding for me personally in ways that will carry far beyond this course.” The data also demonstrate learning about the interaction between the individual and the whole. Students learn that every person in a system is connected to every other person. Furthermore, they realize that they can change the system. They have seen small conversations cascade through the classroom and generate systemic change. They have seen change in one team affect the entire class. As one student wrote: “I have a completely different outlook on the classroom setting. I have become more active … and have been participating more…We couldn't just sit back and get by with the bare minimum because our peers were depending on us. We didn't want to let each other down.”

Discussion

We emphasize two points of contribution: First, we have extended Axley and McMahon’s (2006) seminal review of complex systems in the classroom, which included three key elements: emergence, connectedness, and feedback loops. We have shown how these elements contribute to a class and develop over its life cycle. Secondly, we have linked the literature on complexity to a student-centered pedagogy that gives students the experience of a complex system. Examples from the authors’ classroom experiences have demonstrated how the concept of emergence facilitates a classroom organization.


169

Connectedness and feedback loops contribute to self-organized learning. To use the gardening metaphor, connectedness buds in the early phase but does not bloom until the middle phase. As Blatt (2006) observed, people connect to confront structural divergence, ambiguity, or uncertainty, as in the early phase. While most professors want students to develop relationships broadly, students in traditional classes connect with others and feel psychological safety only in a small circle of acquaintances. In contrast, our classroom structures foster and capitalize on connectedness: students participate with confidence and develop strong relationships widely. Feedback loops apparently take longer to emerge, perhaps requiring connectedness. Students critiqued their peers’ efforts with platitudes and polite commentary in the early phases. As they connected in the middle phase, students critiqued more authentically, sharing both positive and negative perceptions. This more potent feedback eventually taught students important lessons about sharing leadership. Apparently, transcendent lessons require feedback. Thus, connectedness and feedback loops, essential elements of a complex, adaptive system, require time and cultivation to develop and to produce transcendent learning. Accordingly, the second research question focused on a professor’s facilitation of emergence in the classroom. Like gardeners preparing the soil and planting seeds, early in the class the professors create the conditions for student leadership to take root. In a classroom arranged and managed in a new way, students develop ambitious goals and strict norms and confront each other on achievement of and deviance from them. The professors encourage students to take ownership of the classroom by participating in forming the agenda, conducting team presentations, facilitating team learning, and developing leadership activities. In the middle phase, students establish their own formal processes and routines, and the professor helps them learn to observe dispassionately and give constructive feedback. As the class matures, the professor coaches students to harvest their learning through self-discovery, reflection and perspective-taking. Students help one another achieve personal learning objectives and the learning outcomes of the course. Emerging from a template, student organization acquires a life of its own and produces intricate human activity. The system unfolds as students interact and develop relationships with each other and with the professor. By making observations in vivo, the professor helps the class become a living laboratory for testing concepts and practices of leadership and organizational behavior. The class becomes its own case study for students, who write about it in their journals and final papers. Throughout the experience, the professor must not instruct too much, even when confronted with students’ initial insecurity. Typically a professor would answer all questions and give clear directions to ease tension. In the shared leadership


170

approach to the classroom, the professor allows students to be anxious, knowing that innovation and change occur at the edge of chaos (Pascale, Milleman, & Gioja, 2001). The professor should not resolve ambiguity for students, but should coach them to resolve it for themselves. The professor instills confidence and a supportive emotional climate to empower students and then gets out of their way. The analysis suggests the following design principles for transferring the lessons of this paper to create a classroom where students become more empowered, responsible, self-directed, and aware of systems dynamics:

• A bottom-up organization emerges from a formal organizational template that functions as a seed. The instructor provides a template for activity but then allows the organization to evolve. To recall the gardening metaphor, students first see the garden trellis, but then their activities fill in the spaces. Figuratively, the students’ emergent activity covers the trellis and becomes the class’s novel structure, usually as a unique interpretation of the original, formal organizational template.

• Give students significant autonomy and responsibility for the class as a system. Sharing leadership in the classroom enhances student achievement. Students are given assignments of significant responsibility: they plan and lead interactive workshops on key topics, they develop and deliver peer-to-peer teaching; their evaluations of their peers count as part of the grade. Students respond tentatively at first, but ultimately report unmatched learning through such experiences.

• Create opportunities for students to connect. Our experience adds evidence to what the literature says: the emergence of an exceptionally effective system requires connectedness (Dutton & Heaphy, 2003). Yet, connectedness does not just happen; it needs attention and nurturing – it needs cultivation. Students more readily step up to classroom leadership after activities where they become acquainted, forge psychological contracts with one another, and develop mutual support.

• Teach students how to observe and how to share high quality

feedback. Students need to see the professor model good feedback. The professor first demonstrates effective feedback when making observations of students presenting or facilitating. Frank, constructive, and supportive, the professor gently pushes students to be so with one another. We teach students to (a) identify others’ effective actions, (b) set measurable self-improvement objectives, and (c) plan suggested changes in detail.


171

In recent years, the professor’s role in higher education has been called into question (Weimer, 2002; Ramsey & Fitzgibbons, 2005). Jarvik (2009) has even called traditional university education obsolete. This study provides a viable alternative: sharing leadership in the classroom. High student engagement results. As their personal and organizational efforts bear fruit, students bear witness to a system emerging inside and outside themselves. They notice new behavior and attitudes in themselves and in others. This experience gives them the courage to engage in active experimentation in the classroom (Kolb, 1984) and to keep growing (Komives, Owen, Longerbeam, Mainella, & Osteen, 2005). Writers such as Alderfer (1972) have called such awareness essential to personal well-being. A key limitation of this study, of course, is its focus on a specific set of courses. Future work should validate the patterns we have discerned. However, our conclusions fit previous findings and perspectives. For instance, Weimer (2003) and Doyle (2008) have both noted student’s initially tentative reaction to learner-centric teaching. In general, our work contributes to the paradigm of the university classroom as a venue for significant, constructivist learning. Finally, this study may benefit professors who want to incorporate shared leadership in their teaching. The systems perspective informs every classroom setting. No matter what design a professor uses, students align themselves to a template of organization, as did the students in this study. Students are more likely to take initiative and exercise positive peer influence if the curriculum includes time for connecting with one another and for sharing high quality feedback, information, perspectives, and energy. In our view, facilitation from the perspective of emergence, because it creates a memorable experience, generates “sticky” learning. Knowledge sharing and feedback in an emergent organization provide deep, applied learning. The classroom structured as an emergent, living system offers opportunities for students to organize, innovate, and flourish as learners and leaders.


172

References Alderfer, C. (1972). Existence, relatedness, & growth. New York: Free Press. Anderson, P. (1999). Complexity theory and organization science. Organization

Science, 10(3), 216-232. Aram, E., & Noble, D. (1999). Educating prospective managers in the complexity

of organizational life. Management Learning, 30(3), 321-342. Axley, S. R., & McMahon, T. R. (2006). Complexity: A frontier for management

education. Journal of Management Education, 30(2), 295-315. Bedau, M. (1997). Weak Emergence. In James Tomberlin (ed.), Philosophical

Perspectives: Mind, Causation, and World, (vol. 11), Blackwell Publishers (pp. 375-399).

Black, J. A., & Edwards, S. (2000). Emergence of virtual or network

organizations: Fad or feature. Journal of Organizational Change

Management, 13(6), 567-576. Blatt, R. (2006). High quality connections as an organizing mechanism in low

structure situations. Presentation given at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Atlanta, GA.

Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis

and code development (1st ed.). Sage Publications. Bunge, M. (2003). Emergence and convergence: Qualitative novelty and the unity

of knowledge. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Burke, W. W. (2002). Organization change: Theory and practice. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage. Burnes, B. (2005). Complexity theories and organizational change. International

Journal of Management Reviews, 7(2), 73–90. Bushe, G. R., & Marshak, R. J. (2009). Revisioning organization development:

Diagnostic and dialogic premises and patterns of practice. Journal of

Applied Behavioral Science. 45(3), 348-368.


173

Doyle, T. (2008). Helping students learn in a learner-centered environment. Sterling, Virginia: Stylus Publications.

Dutton, J. E., & Heaphy, E. D. (2003). The power of high-quality connections. In

K.S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive

Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline (pp. 263-278). San Francisco: Berrett Koehler.

Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work

teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory:

Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. Goldstein, J. (1999). Emergence as a construct: History and issues. Emergence

1(1), 49-72. Highhouse, S. (2002). A history of the T-group and its early applications in

management development. Group Dynamics, 6(4), 277-290. Jarvik, E. (2009). Universities will be 'irrelevant' by 2020, Y. professor says.

Deseret News. Retrieved January 8, 2010, from

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705298649 /Universities-will-be-irrelevant.html.

Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). Organizations and system concepts. In D. Katz &

R.L. Kahn The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed., pp. 270-280). New York: Wiley.

Kauffman, S. (1995). At home in the universe: The search for laws of self-

organization and complexity. New York: Oxford University Press. Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and

development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Komives, S. R., Owen, J. E., Longerbeam, S. D., Mainella, F.C., & Osteen, L.


College Student Development, 46, 593-611.


174

Livne-Tarandach, R., & Bartunek, J. M. (2009). A new horizon for organizational change and development scholarship: Connecting planned and emergent change. In R. W. Woodman, W. A. Pasmore, & A. B. Shani (Eds.), Research in Organizational Change and Development (Vol. 17, pp. 1-35). Emerald Group/JAI.

Martinez, S. M. (2010). Leadership for complexity and adaptability. In S. Jaspar

(ed.), Securing freedom in the global commons. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, (pp. 159-173).

Mathews, K., White, M., & Long, R. (1999). Why study the complexity sciences

in The social sciences. Human Relations, 52(4), 439-462. McAndrew, D. (1997). Chaos, complexity, and fuzziness. English Journal, 86(7),

37-43. Olson, E. E., & Eoyang, G. H. (2001). Facilitating organization change: lessons

from complexity science. Hoboken, NJ: Pfeiffer Publishing. Owen, H. (2008). Open space technology: A user's guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco:

Berrett-Koehler. Pascale, R., Milleman, M., & Gioja, L. (2001). Surfing the edge of chaos: The

laws of nature and the new laws of business. New York: Crown Publishing Group.

Radio Lab (2003). Emergence. http://www.radiolab.org/2007/aug/14/. Ramsey, J., & Fitzgibbons, D. (2005). Being in the classroom. Journal of

Management Education. 29(2), 333-356. Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (Eds.) (2001). Handbook of action research.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Rifkin, J. (1980). Entropy: A new world view. New York: Viking. Robinson, K. (2010). RSA Animate - Changing education paradigms. (United

Kingdom: RSA Events, http://www.cognitivemedia.co.uk). Retrieved January 21, 2011 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U.

Waldrop, M. (1992). Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and

chaos. New York: Touchstone.


175

Weick, K. (2000). Emergent change as a universal in organizations. In M. Beer &

N. Nohria (Eds.), Breaking the Code of Change (pp. 223-241). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching five key changes to practice (1st

ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Wisniewski, M. (2010). Leadership and the millennials: Transforming today’s

technological teens into tomorrow’s leaders. Journal of Leadership

Education, 9(1), 53-67. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.


176

Author Biographies David Bright is an Associate Professor in the Department of Management and International Business, Raj Soin College of Business at Wright State University in Dayton, OH. David teaches leadership, organization development, and organizational behavior. His research focuses on the enablers of excellence in organizational life. Elizabeth Fisher Turesky is an Assistant Professor in the undergraduate and graduate Programs of Leadership and Organizational Studies at the University of Southern Maine, Lewiston-Auburn College. Elizabeth teaches leadership, organizational change and development, and organizational behavior. Her research focuses on the nexus of experiential learning and leadership development. In his retirement from St. Michael’s College, Roger Putzel is working on reducing his carbon footprint and applying the concept of distributed responsibility in new venues, especially high schools. Thomas Stang is a recent graduate of the Raj Soin College of Business at Wright State University in Dayton, OH. Thomas intends to continue his research and studies in Organizational Development, potentially culminating in an advanced degree.


177

Emotionally Intelligent Leadership: An Integrative,

Process-Oriented Theory of Student Leadership

Scott J. Allen, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of Management Department of Management, Marketing and Logistics

John Carroll University University Heights, OH

[email protected]

Marcy Levy Shankman, Ph.D.

Principal MLS Consulting, LLC

Shaker Heights, OH [email protected]

Rosanna F. Miguel, Ph.D.

Visiting Assistant Professor of Management Department of Management, Marketing and Logistics


[email protected]

Abstract Emotionally intelligent leadership (EIL) theory combines relevant models, theories, and research in the areas of emotional intelligence (EI) and leadership. With an intentional focus on context, self and others, emotionally intelligent leaders facilitate the attainment of desired outcomes. The 21 capacities described by the theory equip individuals with the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics to achieve desired results. The purpose of this article is to propose an integrative, process-oriented EIL theory to provide a framework for conceptualizing and integrating future research and practice. The authors review and organize research and theory in emotional intelligence and leadership within the context of higher education, introduce the EIL model, and provide suggestions for future research. The article concludes with practical implications for leadership development in the context of higher education.

Introduction


178

The emotional intelligence, leadership, and higher education literatures have progressed fairly independently of one another. However, they are complementary and together can provide a useful framework for researchers and practitioners in these fields. This paper brings together these respective literatures to gain a more complete conceptualization of leadership in the context of higher education to present a new integrative (Boyer, 1990) and process-oriented theory of emotionally intelligent leadership (EIL). This theory blends two constructs, emotional intelligence and leadership, to form a new construct, EIL. Specifically, in this paper the authors (a) review and organize research and theory in emotional intelligence and leadership within the context of higher education, (b) propose an integrative, process-oriented EIL theory to provide a framework for conceptualizing and integrating future research and practice, (c) offer suggestions for future research, and (d) provide practical implications for leadership development in the context of higher education.

Overview While EIL theory can be usefully applied in various contexts (e.g., executive education in the workplace), higher education has been selected as the starting point for two primary reasons. First, the study of leadership development in higher education is an emerging area of study; therefore, theoretical frameworks for conceptualizing and integrating future research and practice will add substantial value to the growth of the field. Second, the authors believe higher education is an ideal practice field for leadership development and these programs should be designed to equip individuals with the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics to achieve desired results.

Research and Theory Higher Education

Leadership development is consistently mentioned as a core focus and desired outcome for U.S. colleges and universities (Astin, 1997; Johnson, 2000; Shertzer & Shuh, 2004). Cress, Astin, Zimerman-Oster, and Burkhardt (2001) found that leadership development programs positively impact educational and personal development in addition to leadership skills. More recently, Dugan and Komives (2007) note that student leadership development programs have grown exponentially over the last 15 years, with one study estimating more than 1000 programs on college campuses in the United States alone.


179

Because involvement on campus is one important avenue for developing leadership, the authors situate EIL theory squarely in this important developmental period for youth (DiPaolo, 2009). However, research linking emotional intelligence, leadership and collegians are limited. The research that does exist investigates emotional intelligence (EI) as a predictor of variables such as workplace success (Liptak, 2005), social network size (Austin et al., 2005; Van der Zee, Thijs, & Schakel, 2002), mental health (Gupta & Kumar, 2010), and academic success and achievement (Jacques, 2009; Parker et al., 2004). While a few assessments are designed with youth in mind (e.g., The Hay Group’s ESCI-U & Bar-On & Parker’s EQ-i:YV), the authors found only one completed dissertation addressing the intersections mentioned above (Bissessar, 2009). Therefore, EIL theory offers a new approach to understanding leadership development in the context of higher education. It opens the door for future research studies to more closely examine the linkages between the components of the theory to increase our understanding of individual differences in leadership development. From this knowledge, leadership educators, scholars, and practitioners can determine which approaches to development and which capacities are most effective in various situations. It is important to reiterate that while the authors are placing the theory in the context of the undergraduate collegiate environment in this paper, EIL theory has applicability in many other environments. The collegiate environment, because of its inherent qualities and the aforementioned reasons, was deemed a natural starting point to begin to explore the merits of the theory.

Emotional Intelligence

Emotions and emotionality are “perceived to be central to experiences at work and are studied as relevant predictors of performance” (Rajah, Song, & Arvey, 2011, p. 1107). Currently, there are two popular construct models of EI – an ability model (e.g., Mayer & Salovey, 1997) and a mixed model (e.g., Bar-On, 2006; Goleman, 1995). The former proposes that EI overlaps with cognitive ability because EI itself is a type of intelligence (Joseph & Newman, 2010). The EIL theory as proposed in this paper aligns more closely to a mixed model, particularly because it combines two constructs, EI and leadership. Mixed models of EI consist of a wide variety of components, such as personality traits, individual capabilities, and personal characteristics (Day & Carroll, 2008).

The Ability Model of EI proposed by Salovey and Mayer (1990) asserts that EI consists of four hierarchical branches which demonstrate that some of the EI abilities are more psychologically complex than others. This ability model describes emotions and thoughts as intertwined (Caruso, 2003). Mayer and Salovey (1997) assert that emotional intelligence is comprised of four branches.


180

These are the “ability to perceive accurately, appraise, and express emotion; the ability to access and/or generate feelings when they facilitate thought; the ability to understand emotion and emotional knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional and intellectual growth” (p. 10).

The mixed model approach to EI is less favored by some in the academic community (Antonakis, Ashkanasy, & Dasborough, 2009), but is wide spread in its appeal to industry, training, education, and leadership development. These approaches conceptualize EI as a wide variety of personality traits, individual capabilities, and personal characteristics (Day & Carroll, 2008). These models highlight personality traits, characteristics, competencies, skills, and other attributes not associated with Mayer and Salovey’s (1990) model of EI. For instance, Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee (2002) include organizational

awareness as a part of their model; however, Mayer and Salovey (1997) would not consider a component of EI. These models seem to be responding to one critique of the ability model, which is that it describes only one aspect of ability. According to Caruso (2003), “the ability model [is] focused and narrow in scope. This leaves a lot of room for other approaches – whether trait or competency based – to better understand and develop people” (p. 7). Accordingly, other approaches may better understand and develop people because they recognize the multi-faceted nature of human beings. This critique suggests the need for an array of approaches to better understand the complexities and full scope of EI. The following sections highlight three of the more prominent approaches to the mixed models of trait emotional intelligence (Petrides et al., 2010), performance model (Goleman et al., 2002), and personality model (Bar-On, 2006). In part, EIL theory represents an integration of these mixed models.

Trait Emotional Intelligence suggests that self-perceptions and dispositions play a major role in determining one’s EI (Mavroveli, Petrides, Rieffe, & Bakker, 2007). Trait EI aims to comprehensively cover personality dimensions that relate to affect (Mavroveli et al., 2007). As such, trait EI focuses on an individual’s perception of his or her emotional abilities (Petrides, Vernon, Schermer, Ligthart, Boomsma, & Veselka, 2010). Drawing heavily on personality variables such as adaptability, assertiveness, emotional perception (self/others), optimism, self-esteem, and trait empathy, trait EI focuses on behavioral dispositions and self-perceived abilities (Mavroveli et al., 2007) as opposed to information processing (Zhou & George, 2003), which is the hallmark of Mayer and Salovey’s (1990) work.

The Performance Model of EI, first introduced by Goleman (1995) brought EI to mainstream society in his best-selling book Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can


181

Matter More Than IQ. Goleman et al. (2002) refer to this model of EI as a competency or performance model and assert that individual differences in competency levels are primarily responsible for differences in performance. Research shows a number of results associated with the performance model of EI that suggest that those higher in EI are better performers at work (Cherniss, 1999; Goleman, 2001). As such, the performance model has received a great deal of attention in the corporate, education, and non-profit communities, the popular press, and from many in the academic and professional community (Ashkanasy & Daus, 2005).

The final model included in the formulation of EIL theory is the personality model. According to Bar-On (2010), “emotional-social intelligence is a cross-

section of interrelated emotional and social competencies, skills and facilitators

that determine how well we understand and express ourselves, understand others

and relate with them, and cope with daily demands, challenges and pressures”

(para. 1). Like other mixed models of EI, Bar-On (2006) integrates a combination of mental abilities (e.g., emotional self-awareness) with other attributes like independence, self-regard, and mood. Bar-On’s approach to EI includes five factors (intrapersonal, interpersonal, stress management, adaptability, general mood) along with 15 overlapping competencies, skills, and other characteristics (Bar-On, 2010).

Leadership

Historically, the literature on leadership has focused primarily on the leader as the focal point. However, in recent years followers and the context have become more prominent in the work of scholars who understand that focusing on only the leader can be limiting and an over-simplification of the complexity of leadership (Avolio & Gardner, 2005; Kellerman, 2004; Uhl-Bien, Marion, & McKelvey, 2007). This heuristic of leader-follower-context (Fiedler, 1972) provides a basis from which to begin our exploration of leadership. This structure of leadership (leader-follower-context) provides the framework for EIL theory.

An essential factor of EIL theory that is not present in many models of leadership is the inclusion of context as a focal element. Although several scholars have mentioned context in their work on leadership (Allen & Mease, 2001; Avolio & Gardner, 2005; Day & Lance, 2004; Fiedler, 1995; Hartley & Hinksman, 2003; Heifetz, 1994; Hickman, 2010; House & Mitchell, 1974; Liden & Antonakis, 2009; London, 2002; Zenger, Ulrich, & Smallwood, 2000), the topic has largely been neglected in the intersection of the leadership and EI literature (Goleman, et al., 2002) and college student leadership development (Dugan & Komives, 2011; HERI, 1996).


182

The classic work of Fiedler (1972) has been refreshed with more recent work that recognizes the importance of context or the larger system in which a leader and followers work (Avolio & Gardner, 2005; Heifetz & Linsky, 2002; Uhl-Bien, Marion, & McKelvey, 2007). Avolio and Gardner (2005) underscore the importance of context when they emphasize the reality that leadership occurs in a dynamic context. Given that the context is the environment in which leaders and followers work, the ability to accurately diagnose both the internal group dynamics and external environmental forces or factors will contribute to success or failure (Day & Lance, 2004; Goleman et al., 2002; Hartley & Hinksman, 2003; Heifetz & Linsky, 2002; London, 2002; Zenger, Ulrich, & Smallwood, 2000). For these reasons, the importance of considering the setting and situation in which leadership occurs is an essential component to understanding and demonstrating effective leadership (Hickman, 2010; Wren, 1995). Leadership is not a formulaic or textbook process, especially because the external forces in an environment are fluid and dynamic.

The majority of the research on leadership focuses on the individual leader’s behaviors or actions (Bass, 1985; Kouzes & Posner, 2007), personality traits and individual characteristics (Bass, 2008; Blanchard, Zigarmi & Nelson, 1993; Goleman, 2000), and so forth. The behaviors, practices or actions of leaders are the central focus of models by Kouzes and Posner (2007) and Bass (1985) who describe how leaders accomplish great results. For instance, according to Bass (1985), transformational leadership is defined by individualized consideration (IC), intellectual stimulation (IS), inspirational motivation (IM), and idealized influence (II). Likewise, Kouzes and Posner (2007) suggest that their five exemplary practices of leaders include modeling the way, challenging the process, inspiring a shared vision, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart. Ultimately, these are actions or behaviors that leaders do to achieve results. From a personality perspective, many scholars emphasize concepts such as optimism and self-efficacy or self-esteem, which are heralded by Avolio and Luthans (2006) and Goleman et al. (2002) as crucial ingredients for effective leadership. Self-awareness requires knowing oneself and one’s values as well as how one’s actions affect others. A focus on self suggests that self-awareness is an important attribute of effective leaders (Avolio, 2005; Avolio & Gardner, 2005; Ciarrochi & Godsell, 2006; Conger, 1992; Gardner, 1983; Goleman et al., 2002; HERI, 1996; Komives, Lucas, & McMahon, 2007; London, 2002; McCauley & Van Velsor, 2005; Rath & Conchie, 2008). Since this is a lifelong endeavor, the process of growth and development represents a long-term commitment to development rather than a one-time event (Avolio & Gibbons, 1989).

Like the topic of context, historically followers and the concept of followership has received minimal attention as a fundamental area of focus in the leadership


183

literature (Bennis, 2000). In recent years followers and followership have received greater attention in the literature (Carsten, Uhl-Bien, West, Patera, & McGregor, 2010; Meindl, 1995). However, a challenge is that with the term follower there comes a level of preconceived notions of obedience and meekness (Yukl, 2010). Gardner (1990) asserts that the term suggests passivity and dependence. Interestingly, followers themselves construct the role in various ways from passive or obedient to proactive (Carsten et al., 2010; Kelley, 1988). Perhaps as a result of these perceptions a specific focus on followers is a relatively new realm in leadership theory. Some scholars and researchers take a more proactive view on the role of followers and suggest that to be successful socially, group effort is required; as a result, both leadership and followership are important (Chaleff, 2003). Others have focused on the concept itself and even presented a model for effective and less effective followership (Kelley, 1988; Kellerman, 2008). In one of the first major articles to focus on followers, Kelley (1988) suggests that the success of organizations is a result, at least in part, of how effectively followers follow. In essence, leaders and followers work together to facilitate results. Hence, it is important to underscore the role that followers play in leadership. After all, as Kellerman (2008) suggests, individuals are first followers.

EIL Theory

The foundation for EIL theory is based on the blending of two critical constructs, EI and leadership. These two constructs form a new construct termed EIL. Integrative (Boyer, 1990) and process-oriented, the theory views leadership as dynamic and contingent upon three primary factors which interact in meaningful ways: context, self, and others (Fiedler, 1972). The three factors are comprised of 21 sub-factors, termed capacities (see Table 1). These factors and capacities stem from both the EI and leadership literatures discussed previously. EIL theory conceptualizes the construct of EIL as a combination of cognitive processes, personality traits, behaviors, and competencies that interact with one another and predict critical outcomes in leadership situations. The authors believe that to isolate any one of these would be limiting; demonstrating one’s EIL may include any of the capacities, or even all of them, depending upon the situation. After all, individuals bring a baseline level of cognition about emotions (Mayer & Salovey, 1997), inherent personality traits (Bar-On, 2010; Petrides & Furnham, 2000), and performance levels/competencies (Goleman et al., 2002) to any leadership situation. To negate one is to diminish the complexities of identity, human performance potential, leadership, and EI. EIL theory asserts that these capacities influence an individual’s ability to diagnose leadership challenges, identify an appropriate course of action and to intervene as necessary to facilitate desired


184

outcomes. Table 1 provides the categorization of the three factors (context, self, and others) and 21 sub-factors or capacities. The 21 capacities were chosen based on a qualitative review of the literature on leadership and emotional intelligence. It is important to note that at least five of the capacities in Table 1 are proposed to be aspects of EI while the other 16 are considered to be aspects of leadership. The five proposed EI capacities are emotional self-control, emotional self-perception, flexibility, optimism, and empathy. Table 1 Three Factors and 21 Capacities of EIL

Context

Being aware of the environment in which leaders and followers work

• Environmental awareness: Thinking intentionally about the environment of a

leadership situation (Bass, 2008; Burns, 1978; Heifetz, Grashow & Linsky, 2009; Tichy & Bennis, 2008; Uhl-Bien, Marion, & McKelvey, 2007; Yukl, 2010)

• Group savvy: Interpreting the situation and/or networks of an organization (Bass, 2008; Cragan & Wright, 1999; Schein, 1988; Tuckman, 1965)

Self Being aware of yourself in terms of your abilities and emotions

• Emotional self-perception: Identifying your emotions and reactions and their impact on you (Bar-On, 2007; Goleman, 2000; Goleman et al., 2002; Petrides, Sangareau, Furnham, & Frederickson, 2006; Mayer & Salovey, 1997)

• Honest self-understanding: Being aware of your own strengths and

limitations (Avolio, 2005; Bass, 2008; Bennis & Nanus, 1997; Goleman, 2000; HERI, 1996; Komives & Wagner, 2009; McCauley & VanVelsor, 2004; Salovey & Mayer, 1990; Taylor, 2010; Yukl, 2010)

• Healthy self-esteem: Having a balanced sense of self (Avolio & Luthans, 2006; Bass, 1960; Bass, 2008; Baumeister et al., 2003; Buckingham & Clifton, 2001; Cowley, 1931; McCauley & Van Velsor, 2004; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991)

• Emotional self-control: Consciously moderating your emotions and reactions (Avolio & Luthans, 2006; Bass, 2008; George, 2007; Goleman, et al., 2002; Kellerman, 2004; Lord & Hall, 2005; Mayer & Salovey, 1997; McCauley & Van Velsor, 2004; Petrides et al., 2006; Yukl, 2010)

• Authenticity: Being transparent and trustworthy (Avolio & Gardner, 2005; Bass, 2008; George, 2007; Kouzes & Posner, 2010; Yukl, 2010)

• Flexibility: Being open and adaptive to changing situations (Avolio, 2005; Bar-On, 2007; Bass, 1990; Bass, 2008; Blanchard, Zigarmi, & Nelson,


185

1993; Buckingham & Clifton, 2001; Kaplan & Kaiser, 2006; Goleman et al., 2002; Petrides, et al., 2006)

• Achievement: Being driven to improve according to personal standards (Bar-On, 2007; Buckingham & Clifton, 2001; Bass, 1990; Bass, 2008; Cleveland, 1985; Czikszentmihalyi, 1990; Fisher & Sharp, 1998; Stringer, 2001)

• Optimism: Being positive (Avolio & Luthans, 2006; Bar-On, 2007; Bass, 2008; Boyatzis & McKee, 2005; Buckingham & Clifton, 2001; Goleman et al., 2002; Johnson, 2009; Petrides et al., 2006; Seligman, 1998)

• Initiative: Wanting and seeking opportunities (Bass, 2008; Buckingham & Clifton, 2001; Fischer & Sharp, 1998; Nash & Stevenson, 2004; Petrides et al., 2006; Zander & Zander, 2000)

Others Being aware of your relationship with others and the role they play in the

leadership process

• Empathy: Understanding others from their perspective (Bar-On, 2007; Bass, 2008; Boyatzis & McKee, 2005; Buckingham & Clifton, 2001; Eisenberg & Lennon, 1983; Lawrence, Shaw, Baker, Baron-Cohen & David, 2004; McCauley & Van Velsor, 2004; Petrides et al., 2006)

• Citizenship: Recognizing and fulfilling your responsibility for others or

the group (Bass, 2008; Ciulla, 1998; HERI, 1996; Johnson, 2009; Komives & Wagner, 2009; Northouse, 2010).

• Inspiration: Motivating and moving others toward a shared vision (Bass, 1985; Bass, 2008; Kouzes & Posner, 2008; Roberts, 2007)

• Influence: Demonstrating skills of persuasion (Bass, 1990; Bass, 2008; Burns, 1978; Chaleff, 2003; Cialdini, 1988; Rost, 1991; Whetten & Cameron, 2007; Yukl, 2010)

• Coaching: Helping others enhance their skills and abilities (Avolio, 2005; Bass, 1985; Bass, 2008; Buckingham & Clifton, 2001; Day, 2001; Kilburg, 1996a; Kilburg, 1996b; London, 2002; Wasylyshyn, 2003)

• Change agent: Seeking out and working with others toward new directions (Bass, 1990; Bass, 2008; Heifetz & Linsky, 2002; Hickman, 2010; Kotter & Cohen, 2002)

• Conflict management: Identifying and resolving problems and issues with others (Bass, 2008; HERI, 1996; Lang, 2009; Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument, 2010; Tjosvold & Su Fang, 2004; McCauley & Van Velsor, 2004; Whetten & Cameron, 2007)

• Developing relationships: Creating connections between, among, and with people (Bar-On, 2007; Bass, 1990; Bass, 2008; Blake & Mouton, 1964; Buckingham & Clifton, 2001; Chaleff, 2002; Couto & Eken, 2002; George, 2007; Heaphy & Dutton, 2008; HERI, 1996; Komives & Wagner, 2009; Petrides et al., 2006)


186

• Teamwork: Working effectively with others in a group (Avolio, 1999; Bass, 2008; HERI, 1996; Katzenbach & Smith, 2003; Kogler Hill, 2010; LaFasto & Larson, 2001; Lencioni, 2002; Lipman-Blumen & Leavit, 1999; Wagman, Nunes, Burruss, & Hackman, 2008; Yukl, 2010)

• Capitalizing on differences: Building on assets that come from differences with others (Bass, 2008; Buckingham & Clifton, 2001; Elron, 1997; Mai-Dalton, 1993; McRae & Short, 2010; Offerman & Phan, 2002; Yukl, 2010)

Figure 1 below illustrates the proposed EIL model. As this model indicates, the three factors (termed “facets”) of EIL are viewed as interrelated. The 21 proposed capacities fall within these three factors. Measurement of these 21 capacities, and thus the three factors, will provide an assessment of an individual’s EIL.

Figure 1. The EIL Model.

According to the model, EIL is predictive of student leader behaviors (e.g., participation, engagement). These behaviors are then predictive of individual, group, and organizational outcomes (e.g., group success in attaining goals). This model has not been empirically tested at this time. We propose that researchers should begin examining these relationships and clarify what behaviors and outcomes can be predicted by EIL.

EIL Self

EIL

Others

EIL Self

E

I

L

S

e

l

f

Student Leader Behaviors

Individual, Group and Organizational Outcomes


187

The Working Definition

Based on EIL theory, the current working definition of the proposed construct of emotionally intelligent leadership is:

With an intentional focus on context, self and others, emotionally intelligent leaders facilitate the attainment of desired outcomes. The 21 capacities equip individuals with the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics to achieve desired results.

Assumptions of EIL Theory The purpose of this section is to make explicit the foundational assumptions of EIL theory. The authors’ understanding and development of the theory is evolving and the following assumptions highlight some of the considerations and perspectives that have guided the process to date.

Leader, Followers, Context

At its core EIL theory asserts that leadership is a relationship between the leader, followers, and the context. For an individual to successfully approach the complexities of leadership, the authors assert that EIL will serve the individual well in working with others and adapting to the challenges and opportunities as needed. With attributes of EI as a foundation, EIL incorporates the idea that emotions influence thoughts, decisions, and behaviors. This continuum provides insight and awareness to the individual engaged in leadership. The ability, then, to monitor one’s own emotions while being aware of the emotional reactions and dynamics in others is a core element of EI and EIL theory.

Intentionality & Sense Making

Intentionality and deliberate choice of action is a key element of EIL theory. Likewise, EIL theory advocates for what Weick (1995) calls sense making in the process of demonstrating leadership. Sense making describes the process by which people seek to understand and clarify ambiguous or ill-defined situations or environments, including organizational contexts, crisis situations (Boin & Hart, 2003), and unstructured environments. Intentionality and sense making move individuals out of the domain of relying on their defaults. According to Meissen (2010), defaults are “the behaviors in which we naturally engage in many different situations that have worked for us so often in the past” (p. 79). The degree to which an individual possesses each of the 21 capacities influence an individual’s ability to choose intentionally an approach appropriate for the


188

context. Returning to Meissen (2010), skillful intervention involves choosing to respond in a carefully designed manner to positively impact a situation. By doing so, EIL theory proposes that an individual will be more likely to intervene in an intentional manner yielding a better chance for successful outcomes. EIL Can Be Developed

EIL can be developed. Like many other scholars (Avolio & Gibbons, 1989; Conger, 1992), the authors assert that this developmental process is a long-term and intentional endeavor. Ensuring that students actually use and internalize the information is a challenging endeavor (Posner, 2009; Williams, Townsend, & Linder, 2004). As for developing EI, opinions differ based on a scholar’s chosen theoretical model and perspective. The authors subscribe to the viewpoint that EIL can be developed with a long-term focus on deliberate practice (Ericsson, Krampe & Clemens, 1993), coaching, reflection, and intentionality.

The EI in EIL

As mentioned previously, EIL theory is a mixed model theory. Not all of the capacities included would be considered pure EI. EIL theory asserts that EI is a core foundation for effective leadership. To integrate the proposed EIL theory within the existing EI literature, the authors have identified the EIL capacities that most closely resemble components of the four primary models of EI (see Table 2). However, future research investigating the distinctions among the capacities is needed. The capacities listed are represented in three or more of the four models of EI so the authors have chosen to explore them first as a cluster of EI capacities.

Table 2

Themes in Four Primary Models of Emotional Intelligence

EIL Capacity Petrides

et al.

Goleman

et al.

Mayer &

Salovey

Bar-On

Emotional Self-Control X X X

Emotional Self-Perception

X X X X

Flexibility X X X

Optimism X X X

Empathy X X X X


189

Research Implications EIL theory integrates two constructs, and encourages researchers to hypothesize links and interactions between EIL capacities as well as the three primary factors of context, self, and others. Preliminary factor analyses using an EIL Inventory developed by the authors have supported the distinction between the three primary factors of context, self, and others. The authors call for specifications among antecedents, mediators, moderators, and outcomes of EIL, and the study of interactions among the various factors and sub-factors of EIL theory. In addition, future research will need to empirically examine these capacities to test our propositions that there is a distinction between EI and leadership and a distinction among each of the 21 capacities. While the theory proposes 21 capacities, research may show that some of these capacities overlap significantly enough to be merged together. Further, there is a need to better understand the perceived outcomes of EIL as it relates to student leadership. For instance, which EIL factors best align with student perceptions of effective leaders and what are the results of said interventions? Little has been written on the topic of outcomes of effective student leadership. The field would benefit from a better understanding how students perceive and experience leadership. In addition, how do students experience an under- or over-use of the EIL capacities? For instance, how is an over-achiever perceived by others? How does the over-use of various capacities impact a student’s ability to lead others? One hypothesis, for example, may be that individuals with a low capacity to demonstrate optimism and inspiration may have a difficult time engaging and motivating others to work above and beyond the minimum levels of participation. Further investigation is needed to understand how students perceive and experience the demonstration of EIL capacities. Given the integrative nature of the EIL theory, and more specifically its integration of EI with leadership, do the individual factors (context, self, and others) or a specific combination of them predict effectiveness more so than others? Likewise, are some factors more aligned with certain types of results? For instance, consciousness of others may align better with the outcome of positive relationships while consciousness of self may be aligned with the outcome of goal attainment and producing measurable results. This research may be conducted via a multi-rater assessment that specifically addresses perceptions of an individual’s mastery of the facets with a number of leadership outcomes.


190

A final area for future research focuses on the developmental level of students. Are some capacities or factors more readily available depending on a person’s development level versus others? For instance, an individual at Kegan’s (1994) “imperial stage” may be more focused on self than others or context. As a result, there may be a hierarchy to EIL factors (context, self, and others) resulting in certain capacities or groups of capacities requiring higher order development. In fact, the constructive/developmental view of leadership has a number of implications for the study of leadership and student leadership development. Day and Lance (2004) suggest that individuals at lower levels of development will likely construct leadership out of a place of dominance: a transactional place. A more sophisticated level of leadership requires interpersonal influence which may be more inclusive and allow the leader more flexibility. Helping leaders understand and examine where they work from develops self-awareness and provides additional tools for success. This same line of inquiry could apply to the leadership identity development (LID) model as well (Komives et al., 2005).

Practical Implications The practical implications of EIL primarily revolve around the training, education, and development of leadership. Conger (1992) suggests four primary objectives for leadership development which include conceptual understanding, skill building, feedback, and personal growth. The authors assert that EIL theory can be used to develop leadership in all four areas depending on the objective of the practitioner. EIL theory has already been applied in the classroom and as the organizing structure for a semester long academic course. Like many other formal courses, the primary focus of a classroom-based learning experience is conceptual understanding. These courses have been housed most often in student affairs, leadership studies, or first year experience-type courses. EIL theory has also been incorporated into leadership courses as another theory for consideration alongside models like the five practices set forth by Kouzes and Posner (2007) or the social change model of leadership (HERI, 1996). Along with formal coursework, EIL theory has been applied in training and development workshops in the United States and abroad. The length of these workshops varies between one hour and three days. The audiences vary as well. Workshop participants are often formal and informal leaders on college/university campuses and are members of organizations such as residence life, Greek life, student government, programming board, athletics, and other organizations traditionally housed in student affairs. Similar to formal coursework, EIL theory often serves as the framework for the retreat or workshop content. To be more


191

specific, the content may focus on EIL comprehensively as an approach to leadership or simply one or two of the EIL capacities. The focus of these interventions is personal growth, conceptual understanding, feedback, and skill building. A final practical use of EIL theory is its use with leadership educators. Train-the-trainer programs have been delivered to camp counselors, resident advisors, and secondary educators in Singapore and the United States along with leadership educators and student affairs professionals whose primary work occurs on the college campus. The focus of these interventions revolves around the appropriate use of the theory, resources available to educators, and various activities and tools for development. Naturally, the primary focus of these interventions is how to set up a learning environment and learning opportunities to foster personal growth, conceptual understanding, feedback, and skill development in others (Conger, 1992).

Conclusion From the outset, one of the goals for the authors and this work was to provide undergraduate students and those who work with students a user-friendly and straightforward framework that incorporates the best of EI and leadership theory and practice. What resulted was a unique, integrative, and process-oriented theory that blends emotional intelligence with leadership. This theory consists of a multi-faceted and dynamic construct – emotionally intelligent leadership. With an intentional focus on context, self, and others, emotionally intelligent leaders facilitate the attainment of desired outcomes. The 21 capacities equip individuals with the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics to achieve desired results. Future research is needed to clarify the relationships, interactions, mediators, moderators, and outcomes of these variables to further our understanding of the theory. This will allow practitioners to construct and implement useful tools and approaches to developing leaders in a wide variety of contexts.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the following individuals for the careful feedback and comments on earlier drafts of this work – Richard Couto, Don DiPaolo, Susan Komives, Paige Haber, Michael Hackman, Beth Martin, Tony Middlebrooks


192

References Allen, K. E., & Mease, W. P. (2001). Energy optimization and the role of the

leader. Retrieved from http://kathleenallen.net/index.php?option=com_docman&Itemid=5&limitstart=25

Antonakis, J., Ashkanasy, N. M., & Dasborough, M. T. (2009). Does leadership

need emotional intelligence? The Leadership Quarterly, 20(2), 247-261. Ashkanasy, N. M., & Daus, S. (2005). Rumors of the death of emotional

intelligence in organizational behavior are vastly exaggerated. Journal of

Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 441-452. Astin, A. W. (1997). What matters in college: Four critical years revisited. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Austin, E. J., Saklofske, D. H., & Egan, V. (2005). Personality, well-being and

health correlates of trait emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual

Differences, 38, 547–558. Avolio, B. J. (1999). Full range leadership: Building the vital forces in

organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Avolio, B. J. (2005). Leadership development in balance. Mahwah, New Jersey:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development:

Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. Leadership Quarterly,

16, 315-338. Avolio, B., & Gibbons, T. (1989). Developing transformational leaders: A life

span approach. In Conger, J., & Kanungo, R. (Eds.), Charismatic

leadership: The Elusive factor in organizational effectiveness (pp. 276-308). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Avolio, B. J., & Luthans, F. (2006). The high impact leader. New York: McGraw

Hill. Bar-On, R. (2006). The Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence (ESI).

Psichothema, 18 (Suppl), 13-25.


193

Bar-On, R. (2007). The Bar-On model of emotional intelligence: A valid, robust and applicable EI model. Organisations & People, 14, 27-34.

Bar-On, R. (2010). A broad definition of emotional-social intelligence according

to the Bar-On model. Retrieved from http://www.reuvenbaron.org/bar-on-model/essay.php?i=2

Bass, B. (1960). Leadership, psychology, and organizational behavior. New

York: Harper.

Bass, B. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York:

The Free Press. Bass, B. (1990). Bass & Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: Theory, research and

managerial applications (3rd ed.). New York: The Free Press. Bass, B. (2008). The Bass Handbook of Leadership: Theory, research and

managerial applications (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press. Bennis, W. (2000). Managing the dream. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing. Baumeister, R., Campbell, J., Krueger, J., & Vohs, K. (2003). Does high self-

esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier lifestyles? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4(1), 1-44.

Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (1997). Leaders: Strategies for taking charge. New

York: Harper Collins. Bissessar, C. S. G. (2009). College students’ emotional intelligence, extrinsic and

intrinsic motivation as measurement of students’ transformational leadership. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities

and Social Sciences, 69, 4240. Blake, R. R., & Mouton, J. S. (1964). The managerial grid. Houston: Gulf.

Blanchard, K. H., Zigarmi, D., & Nelson, R. B. (1993). Situational leadership

after 25 years: A retrospective. The Journal of Leadership Studies, 1(1), 21-36.

Boin, A., & Hart, P. (2003). Public leadership in times of crisis: Mission

impossible? Public Administration Review, 63(5), 544-553.


194

Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2005). Resonant leadership: Renewing yourself

and connecting with others through mindfulness, hope and compassion.

Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. (Eric

Document Reproduction Service No. ED326149. Retrieved May 5, 2009 from ERIC database: http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED326149&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED326149

Buckingham, M., & Clifton, D. O. (2001). Now discover your strengths. New

York: Free Press. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. Carsten, M. K., Uhl-Bien, M., West, B. J., Patera, J. L., & McGregor, R. (2010).

Exploring social constructions of followership: A qualitative study. Leadership Quarterly, 21(3), 543-562.

Caruso, D. (2003). Defining the inkblot called Emotional Intelligence. Issues and

Recent Developments in Emotional Intelligence, 1(2). Retrieved from http://www.eiconsortium.org

Chaleff, I. (2003). The courageous follower: Standing up to and for our leaders

(2nd ed.). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Cherniss, C. (1999). The business case for emotional intelligence. Retrieved from

http://www.eiconsortium.org/reports/business_case_for_ei.html Cialdini, R. B. (1988). Influence: Science and practice. Glenview, IL: Scott,

Foresman. Ciarrochi, J., & Godsell, C. (2006). Mindfulness-based emotional intelligence:

Research and training. In Sala, F., Druskat, V. U., & Mount, G. (Eds.), Linking emotional intelligence and performance at work: Current

research evidence with individuals and groups (pp. 21-52). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Ciulla, J. B. (2004). Ethics: The heart of leadership. Westport, CT: Praeger. Cleveland, H. (1985). The knowledge executive: Leadership in an information society.

New York: Dutton.


195

Conger, J. (1992). Learning to lead: The art of transforming managers into

leaders. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Couto, D., & Eken, S. (2003). To give their gifts. Nashville: Vanderbilt University

Press. Cowley, W. H. (1931). Traits of face-to-face leaders. Journal of Abnormal and

Social Psychology, 26, 304-313. Cragan, J. F., & Wright, D. W. (1999). Communication in small groups: Theory,

process, skills. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Cress, C. M., Astin, H. S., Zimerman-Oster, K., & Burkhardt, J. C. (2001).

Developmental outcomes of college students’ involvement in leadership activities. Journal of College Student Development, 42(1), 15-27.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New

York: Harper & Row. Day, A. L., & Carroll, S. A. (2008). Faking emotional intelligence (EI):

Comparing response distortion on ability and trait-based EI measures. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 761-784.

Day, D. (2001). Leadership development: A review in context. Leadership

Quarterly, 11(4), 581-613. Day, D., & Lance, C. (2004). Understanding the development of leadership

complexity through latent growth modeling. In Day, D., Zaccaro, S., & Halpin, S. (Eds.), Leader Development for Transforming Organizations:

Growing Leaders for Tomorrow (pp. 41-69). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

Dugan, J. P., & Komives, S. R. (2007). Developing leadership capacity in college

students: Findings from a national study. A Report from the Multi-Institutional Study of Leadership. College Park, MD: National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs.

DiPaolo, D. G. (2009). When student leaders don’t. Journal of Leadership

Education 7(3), 11-19.


196

Dugan, J. P., & Komives, S. R. (2011). Leadership Theories. In Komives, S. R., Dugan, J. P., Owen, J. E., Wagner, W., Slack, C., & Associates. Handbook

for student leadership development (pp. 35-57). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Eisenberg, N., & Lennon, R. (1983). Sex differences in empathy and related

capacities. Psychological Bulletin, 94(1), 100-131. Elron, E. (1997). Top management teams within multinational corporations:

Effects of cultural heterogeneity. Leadership Quarterly, 8(4), 393. Ericsson, K. S., Krampe, R. T., & Clemens, T-R. (1993). The role of deliberate

practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review,

100(3), 363-406. Fiedler, F. (1972). The effects of leadership training and experience: A

contingency model interpretation. Administrative Science Quarterly,

17(4), 453– 470. Fiedler, F. (1995). Reflection by an accidental theorist. Leadership Quarterly,

6(4), 453-461. Fischer, R., & Sharp, A. (1998). Getting it done: How to lead when you’re not in

charge. New York: Harper Business. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books. Gardner, J. (1990). On leadership. New York: The Free Press. George, B. (2007). True north: Discover your authentic leadership. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the

power of emotional intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam

Books. Goleman, D. (2000) Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review,

March-April, 78-90.


197

Goleman, D. (2001). Emotional intelligence: Issues in paradigm building. In C. Cherniss & D. Goleman (Eds.), The emotionally intelligent workplace: How to select for, measure, and improve emotional intelligence in

individuals, Groups, and Organizations (pp. 13-26). Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the

power of emotional intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Gupta, G. & Kumar, S. (2010). Mental health in relation to emotional intelligence

and self efficacy among college students. Journal of the Indian Academy

of Applied Psychology, 36(1), 61-67. Hartley, J., & Hinksman, B. (2003). Leadership development: A systemic review

of the literature. Retrieved from http://www.leadership.modern.nhs.uk Heaphy, E., & Dutton, J. (2008). Positive social interactions and the human body

at work: Linking organizations and physiology. Academy of Management

Review, 33(1), 137-162. Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge, MA:

Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Heifetz, R. A., & Linsky, M. (2002). Leadership on the line. Cambridge, MA:

Harvard Business Review. Heifetz, R. A., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). Leadership in a (permanent)

crisis. Harvard Business Review, 87(7/8), 62-69. Hickman, G. R. (2010). Leading change in multiple contexts: Concepts and

practices in organizational, community, political, social, and global

settings. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Higher Education Research Institute (HERI) (1996). A social change model of

leadership development, guidebook III. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute.

House, R. J., & Mitchell, T. R. (1974). Path-goal theory of leadership.

Contemporary Business, 3, 81-98.


198

Jacques, E. T. (2009). The relationships between emotional intelligence and the academic performance and selection of a major of college students. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social

Sciences, 70, 1193. Johnson, C. W. (2000). Exploring leadership development for college students

who want to make a difference. NASPA Journal, 38(1), 143-147. Joseph, D. L., & Newman, D. A. (2010). Emotional intelligence: An integrative

meta-analysis and cascading model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 54-78.

Kaplan, R. E., & Kaiser, R. B. (2006). The versatile leader: Make the most of

your strengths without overdoing it. San Francisco: Pfeiffer. Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993). The wisdom of teams: Creating the

high-performance organization. New York: Harper Business. Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad Leadership: What it is, how it happens, why it matters.

Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Kellerman, B. (2008). Followership: How followers are creating change and

changing leaders. Boston: Harvard Business Press. Kelley, R. E. (1988). In praise of followers. Harvard Business Review, Nov.-Dec.,

142-148. Keeling, R. P. (Ed.) (2004). Learning reconsidered: A campus-wide focus on the

student experience. Retrieved from www.myacpa.org/pub/documents/learningreconsidered.pdf

Kilburg, R. R. (1996a). Executive coaching as an emerging competency in the

practice of consultation. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and

Research, 48, 59–60. Kilburg, R. R. (1996b). Toward a conceptual understanding and definition of

executive coaching. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and

Research, 48, 134–144.


199

Kogler Hill, S. E. (2010). Team leadership. In Northouse, P. Leadership: Theory

and practice (5th ed.) (pp. 241-270). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Komives, S. R., & Wagner, W. (2009). Leadership for a better world:

Understanding the social change model of leadership development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


college students who want to make a difference (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.



College Student Development, 46, 593-611. Kotter, J., & Cohen D. S. (2002). The heart of change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

Business Review. Kouzes, J., & Posner, B. (2007). The leadership challenge: How to keep getting

extraordinary things done in organizations (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kouzes J., & Posner, B. (2010). The truth about leadership: The no-fads, heart-

of-the matter, facts you need to know. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. LaFasto, F., & Larson, C. (2001). When teams work best: 6000 team members

and leaders tell what it takes to succeed. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage. Lang, M. (2009). Conflict management: A gap in business education curricula.

Journal of Education for Business, 84(4), 240-245. Lawrence, E. J., Shaw, P., Baker, D., Baron-Cohen, S., & David, A. S. (2004)

Measuring empathy – Reliability and validity of the Empathy Quotient. Psychological Medicine, 34, 911-919.

Lencioni, P. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team: A leadership fable. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Liden, R. C., & Antonakis, J. (2009). Considering context in psychological

leadership research. Human Relations, 62(11), 1587-1605.


200

Lipman-Blumen, J., & Leavitt, H. J. (1999). Hot groups: Seeding them, feeding

them, and using them to ignite your organization. New York: Oxford University Press.

Liptak, J. J. (2005). Using emotional intelligence to help college students succeed

in the workplace. Journal of Employment Counseling, 42(4), 171-178. London, M. (2002). Leadership development: Paths to self-insight and

professional growth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Lord, R. G., & Hall, R. J. (2005). Identity, deep structure and the development of

leadership skill. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(4), 591-615. Mai-Dalton, R. R. (1993). Managing cultural diversity on individual, group, and

organizational levels. In M. M. Chemers, & R. Ayman (eds.), Leadership

theory and research: Perspectives and directions (pp. 189–215). San Diego: Academic Press.

Mandell, B., & Pherwani, S. (2003). Relationship between emotional intelligence

and transformational leadership style: A gender comparison. Journal of

Business & Psychology, 17(3), 387-404. Mavroveli, S., Petrides, K. V., Rieffe, C., & Bakker, F. (2007). Trait emotional

intelligence, psychological well-being and peer-rated social competence in adolescence. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 25(2), 263-275.

Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey,

& D. Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence:

Educational implications (pp. 3–34). New York: Basic Books. McCauley, C. D., & Van Velsor, E. (Eds.). (2004). The center for creative

leadership handbook of leadership development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

McRae, M. B., & Short, E. L. (2010). Racial and cultural dynamics in group and

organizational life. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Meissen, G. (2010). Leadership lexicon. The Journal of Kansas Civic Leadership

Development, 2(1), 78-81. Nash, L., & Stevenson, H. (2004). Success that lasts. Harvard Business Review,

82(2), 101-110.


201

Northouse, P. (2010). Leadership: Theory and practice (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage. Offerman, L., & Phan, L. U. (2002). Culturally intelligent leadership for a diverse

world. In R.E. Riggio, S.E. Murphy, & F.J. Pirozzolo, (eds.), Multiple

intelligences and leadership (pp. 187-214). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.

Parker, J. D. A., Summerfeldt, L. J., Hogan, M. J., & Majeski, S. A. (2004).

Emotional intelligence and academic success: Examining the transition from high school to university. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 163–172.

Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students:

Findings and insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2000). On the dimensional structure of emotional

intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 29(2), 313-320. Petrides, K. V., Sangareau, Y., Furnham, A., & Frederickson, N. (2006). Trait

emotional intelligence and children’s peer relations at school. Social

Development, 15(3), 537-547. Petrides, K., Vernon, P., Schermer, J., Ligthart, L., Boomsma, D., & Veselka, L.

(2010). Relationships between trait emotional intelligence and the Big Five in the Netherlands. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(8), 906-910.

Posner, B. Z. (2009). From inside out: Beyond teaching about leadership. Journal

of Leadership Education, 8(1), 1-10. Rajah, R., Song, Z., & Arvey, R. (2011). Emotionality and leadership: Taking

stock of the past decade of research. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 1107-1119.

Roberts, D. C. (2007). Deeper learning in leadership: Helping college students

find the potential within. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Rost, J. (1991). Leadership for the 21st century. Westport, CT: Praeger.


202

Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination,

cognition, and personality, 9(3), 185–211. Schein, E. H. (1988). Process consultation (Volume 1): Its role in organization

development. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. Seligman, M. (1998). Learned optimism: How to change your Mind and your life.

New York: Pocket Books. Shertzer, J. E., & Shuh, J. H. (2004). College student perceptions of leadership:

Empowering and constraining beliefs. NASPA Journal, 42(1), 111-131. Stringer, R. (2001). Leadership and organizational climate. Upper Saddle River,

NJ: Prentice Hall. Taylor, S. N. (2010). Redefining leader self-awareness by integrating the second

component of self-awareness. Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(4), 57-68. Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (2010). Retrieved from

http://kilmann.com/conflict.html Tichy, N., & Bennis, W. (2008, May). Crisis leadership. Leadership Excellence,

pp. 3-4. Tjosvold, D., & Fang, S. S. (2004). Cooperative conflict management as a basis

for training students in China. Theory Into Practice, 43(1), 80-86. Tuckman, B. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological

Bulletin, 63, 384-399. Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity Leadership

Theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 298-318.

Van der Zee, K., Thijs, M., & Schakel, L. (2002). The relationship of emotional

intelligence with academic intelligence and the Big Five. European

Journal of Personality, 16, 103–125. Wasylyshyn, K. L. (2003). Executive coaching: An outcome study. Consulting

Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 55(2), 94–106. Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Hills, CA: Sage

Publications.


203

Whetten, D. A., & Cameron, K. S. (2010). Developing management skills (8th

ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Williams, J. R., Townsend, C. D., & Linder, J. R. (2004). Teaching leadership:

Do students remember and utilize the concepts we teach? Journal of

Leadership Education, 4(1), 62-74. Wren, J. T. (1995). The leader’s companion: Insights on leadership through the

ages. New York: Free Press. Yukl, G. (2010) Leadership in organizations (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NY:

Prentice Hall. Zander, R. S., & Zander, B. (2000). The art of possibility: Transforming

professional and personal life. New York: Penguin Books. Zenger, J., Ulrich, D., & Smallwood, N. (2000). The new leadership development.

Training & Development, 54(3), 22-27. Zhou, J., & George, G. M. (2003). Awakening employee creativity: The role of

leader emotional intelligence. Leadership Quarterly, 14, 545-568.


204

Evaluating Innovative Leadership Preparation:

How What You Want Drives What

(and How) You Evaluate

Frederick C. Buskey

Assistant Professor of Educational Leadership 250 Killian Building

Western Carolina University Cullowhee, NC 28723

[email protected]

Meagan Karvonen, Ph.D.

Associate Professor of Educational Research 239 Killian Building

Western Carolina University Cullowhee, NC 28723

[email protected]

Abstract Educational leadership preparation programs are expected to train graduates who change their practice and produce outcomes for teachers and students. However, programs are challenged to produce evidence of their impact while also evaluating for formative purposes. This paper describes collaboration between an educational leadership program director and a program evaluator to construct an evaluation system that incorporated program theory, processes, and outcomes. The leadership preparation program, grounded in ethical leadership practices, had a unique design with core tenets that informed choices about the evaluation design. Decisions about data sources were informed by evaluation foci, the availability of existing data sources, and resource constraints. The complexity of the evaluation design paralleled the complexity of the program itself. Leadership content expertise, evaluation design expertise, and genuine collaboration were all essential to the successful design of this evaluation plan. Several recommendations are offered for others collaborating to design evaluations of their programs.


205

Introduction

Building bridges is the work of education. In graduate education we often speak of the bridge from theory to practice (Hoy & Miskel, 2008; Starratt, 1991; Walker, 1993). However, if the theory rests in the university and the practice resides in K-12 schools, there is no guarantee that the bridge will be built. At our regional comprehensive university, we recently redesigned our principal licensure programs to blend practice in K-12 schools with learning in our graduate courses. Assessing whether or not we are successful in creating the theory-to-practice bridge presents complex challenges. Orr (2009) described the pressures and pitfalls of linking program preparation to leadership practice, yet called on programs to “build measures into our assessment systems that look beyond standardized test data to measure student and program accomplishment” (p. 448). Beyond outcome measures, stakeholders need additional types of information for both formative and summative evaluation purposes. While some researchers have described how individual assignments link theory to practice (Smith & Roebuck, 2010) or how a program affects adaptive skills in particular (Blackwell, Cummins, Christine, Townsend, & Cummings, 2007), this paper explores the challenges of evaluating the holistic theory-to-practice effects of a complete program aligned to the program’s intentional ethical design. This paper describes the process of developing an evaluation system for our newly designed leadership programs. We begin with some background, including the programmatic context and the evaluation theories that guided the work. We then describe how the evaluation was conceived, including an overview of the evaluation design process, some factors that influenced the design choices, and the design elements themselves. We conclude with recommendations for a step-by-step process for constructing an evaluation system. As others grapple with the changing landscape of program evaluation and the increasing pressures to link leadership preparation with results in the schools (Duncan, 2010; Fry, O’Neil, & Bottoms, 2006; Orr & Orphanos, 2011), we hope to provide a framework for evaluating principal licensure programs. We address multiple evaluation questions, including the relationship between preparation, practice, and impact in schools, and how to tailor evaluation to the program’s intended design. The purpose of this paper is not to describe evaluation findings, but to outline an evaluation design process. By detailing our processes, we hope to help others involved in leadership education develop their own program evaluation capacity.

Background The foundation for this exploration includes the contextual elements of the specific program being evaluated and the theoretical frameworks of several


206

different, yet complimentary, approaches to program evaluation. The unique program model drove many of the decisions about the evaluation design.

Context of the Programs

In the fall of 2007, seven faculty members began redesigning two programs for preparing school leaders: the Master’s of School Administration (MSA) and what came to be known as the Post-Master’s Certificate in Public School Leadership (PMC). The programs now consist of a common core of 24 credits including an assessment course; four integrated, consecutive leadership courses; three consecutive internships; and, three specialized administrative topics courses. The MSA includes 15 additional credits. The programs admit two cohorts of up to 22 students each fall and spring. Cohorts are integrated. PMC and MSA students work together in online learning communities. Buskey & Jacobs (2009) and Buskey & Topolka-Jorissen (2010) previously described the programs’ redesign processes and features. Five aspects of the programs’ innovations are of particular relevance to program evaluation. The program is based on developing ethical

leadership as a foundation for decision-making and action. Since a significant number of participants do not intend to become line administrators, the program features an approach to developing leaders as change agents regardless of

hierarchical positioning. Every course contains continuous practice in the field. The program design reflects the complexity of school leadership through a correspondingly complex curricular design. The core courses build upon each other, revisiting common themes in increasing layers of complexity. Finally, program participants are expected to develop into leaders who take action by engaging in multiple and complex tasks in their schools. Experimental implementation of the program began in the fall of 2008. In fall 2009, the faculty determined that the old program evaluation system was inadequate for evaluating the new program because the old assessment system was designed to ensure that completers provided evidence covering minimal program competencies and was used to gather evidence for accreditation reviews. The old assessment system did not provide feedback on where the curriculum was strong or weak, nor was there any way to measure how participation in the program impacted participants’ actions in their schools. The old system did not capture any of the unique features of the new program. In the fall of 2009, the authors, one the MSA and PMC program director and re-design leader and the other a program evaluator, began designing a comprehensive evaluation system.

Evaluation Theory

The new program evaluation plan is grounded in a combination of program evaluation theory and models. Drawing on Rossi, Lipsey, and Freeman’s (2004)


207

framework, we targeted three levels for this evaluation: program theory, processes, and outcomes. Program theory is often overlooked in program evaluation but is essential to interpret evaluation findings and guide future modifications to the program’s implementation (Weiss, 1998). A program’s theory articulates what theoretically happens to the targets of an intervention as a result of program implementation. Evaluation of program processes is important for several reasons. For instance, the results may be used to help monitor and adjust program delivery and improve efficiency. Findings from process evaluation may also be used to interpret program outcomes; it is important to know the nature of the “program” that created the outcomes (Rossi et al., 2004). In the context of the MSA and PMC programs, processes include everything from resources, to scheduling, to curriculum, to admissions and advising. Because documentation of outcomes is necessary in today’s educational climate, we gave careful consideration to the structure of this part of the evaluation plan. Several authors in education and organizational development (e.g., Guskey, 2000; Kirkpatrick, 1998) have provided similar models for measuring training outcomes based on stages or levels of outcome. For example, Kirkpatrick’s model includes four levels of outcome: participant reactions, learning, behavior (changed actions on the part of the trainee), and results (the intended impact of training on the problem, setting, etc.). Kirkpatrick’s model is not linear or purely sequential, and others have questioned whether each step depends on previous steps (cf., Schneier, Beatty, & Russell, 1994). We conceptualized these steps as sequential yet interdependent; the sequence occurs repeatedly during the program because of expectations for immediate and ongoing application of learning to the K-12 school environment. As described later, data sources are linked to these four steps. The decision to focus on program theory, processes, and outcomes was driven by program maturity and faculty information needs. The faculty wanted to design an evaluation that examined graduates’ outcomes, consistent with the national policy emphasis on outcomes. However, without articulating the program theory or understanding its processes, interpretation of outcome data would be very limited. Patton’s (2008) principles of utilization-focused evaluation also guided our work. Focusing on the intended uses of the evaluation data and identifying the intended users of the findings helped us prioritize the evaluation purposes, sift through potential data sources, and develop a plan that fit our situation and resources.


208

Evaluation Design The authors’ areas of expertise were in different fields, one in educational leadership and the other in program evaluation and research methods. This section describes the necessity and process of sharing knowledge in order to develop a collective understanding of need and a sound working relationship. We also discuss the involvement of program faculty and the clarification of the purposes of the evaluation.

The Design Process and Evaluation Purposes

The first concrete step to developing the evaluation system required clearly identifying the reasons for evaluation. However, there were other important, preliminary steps. Although the two authors were (and remain) close colleagues, each spoke a different language when it came to evaluation. The program director had conducted an extensive qualitative study of the impacts of individual courses on professional self-image and action (Buskey, 2010) and had grandiose ideas about what program evaluation should be able to tell the faculty. He also had multiple motivations for pursuing program evaluation such as curriculum improvement, teaching feedback, support for external awards, research interest, and knowledge of impact on schools, but lacked clear priorities and a deep understanding of evaluation theory. The evaluator was experienced in designing and conducting program evaluations for a variety of purposes and settings, but lacked knowledge of educational leadership as a content area and the unique curriculum and context of the MSA and PMC programs. The initial foundation for this work emerged from conversations that featured give and take based on what we both brought to the project. Because the evaluator did not know educational leadership literature in great depth, she asked extensive questions that required the program director to explain topics such as various leadership theories and the logic underlying the MSA/PMC course sequence. The program director’s lack of background in evaluation and his expansive ideas about what he wanted to know required the evaluator to help define and reinforce limits in the scope of the evaluation. As we worked through many discussions and consulted MSA faculty, potential intended evaluation purposes emerged. Was the work of developing and teaching the new program worth the effort? Would the future program completers be ethical change agents in their schools? What elements of the program were working and which were not? In turn, these generalized questions led to more specific questions, such as how do program participants’ roles change within their social networks during the program? In addition to questions about linking unique


209

aspects of the program to impact on participants and their schools, we also retained the more common concerns about institutional, state, and national accreditation and review (Orr, 2009). Eventually the scope of the program was narrowed down to evaluation of three distinct purposes:

1. Document the implementation of the revised MSA/PMC programs, including elements that were implemented as intended and those that evolved or changed to meet unforeseen needs.

2. Evaluate the growth of students as leaders while in the program.

3. Evaluate the growth of students after successful completion of the

program. For clarity, the program evaluation is described as a linear process. In reality, the process was less linear and more iterative.

Program Theory and Logic Model

A firm understanding of program theory was an essential foundation for the evaluation. The MSA and PMC programs drew from two different theoretical models. One mirrored the new state standards for school administrators and included traditional theories of hierarchical leadership and management, such as standards on human resource leadership and managerial leadership (North Carolina Department of Public Instruction [NCDPI], 2006). The program faculty also created a set of standards (Buskey & Topolka-Jorissen, 2010) inspired by theories in ethical leadership, professional learning communities, and organizational change. These program standards included a focus on K-12 students; servant leadership, regardless of hierarchical position; change as a complex and ongoing opportunity; ethics as a foundation for action; and, continuous self-improvement. Elements of the theory had been articulated during the program redesign, and the program theory was thoroughly reflected in the design of courses. However, the theory was not yet reflected in the evaluation. Multiple conversations were held about the program during which the evaluator asked the program director questions to elicit information about how the faculty theorized the program would operate. We were able to articulate what was intended during the program and what was hypothesized to happen to students during and after the program. With the program’s focus on enacting ethical leadership (Gross, 2006; Hurley, 2009; Starratt, 1991; Starratt, 2004), the program theory incorporated elements of the reciprocal interactions between candidates and their environments (Orr, 2009). Based on the way leadership was conceptualized in the program, we also captured the idea that various leadership


210

traits and behaviors would grow at different times. Through those conversations, we created a logic model (Knowlton & Phillips, 2009) (see Figure 1) to illustrate the program theory. We validated the model with the rest of the program faculty. The model then served as the foundation for developing process and outcome evaluation questions and methods.

Figure 1. Logic Model for the MSA/PMC Programs.

Program Processes

Evaluation of program processes allows us to monitor several aspects of program design and delivery. For example, this component of the evaluation plan helps us evaluate curriculum alignment, monitor and adjust admission standards, meet documentation needs for accreditation purposes, and track resource use and needs. This information is used formatively, for continuous program improvement. Process evaluation data are also used to support interpretation of program outcome data. For example, if students demonstrate strong leadership outcomes in some areas but weaknesses in others, we can re-evaluate how certain aspects of leadership are taught in the program and redesign instruction accordingly. There are currently three key sources of process evaluation data:

1. Program documents. These include but are not limited to: program meeting minutes, curriculum charts, syllabi, and the program’s


211

document submitted to NCDPI and the UNC System General Administration for approval. These documents are not formally evaluated in isolation; they are used primarily to help interpret outcome data and document the new program as it inevitably evolves over time.

2. A comprehensive database that combines student admission and

academic records maintained by the university and a local database that contains information on changes in enrollment, life events reported by program participants, and cohort membership. This database allows faculty to track student trends across cohorts or by program (MSA and PMC). Much of the information will also be useful for future accreditation purposes. Elements of this database will eventually be linked to student outcome data through unique identifiers to examine outcomes by subgroup, student background variables, and measures of program exposure or progress.

3. A program readiness survey designed to be administered to applicants

prior to program admission. Because the MSA/PMC programs are unique in their content, structure, and delivery model, the faculty noted that some students entered the program unprepared for the workload and faculty expectations and quickly dropped out of the program. The program readiness survey helps faculty determine whether applicants understand the program’s expectations and requirements. In conjunction with the comprehensive database, the results will be used to evaluate patterns and causes of program attrition.

Outcome Evaluation

With our own questions about the program mirroring the national focus on demonstrated program outcomes, the outcome evaluation component was one of the richest and potentially most rewarding parts of the plan. However, it also had the greatest potential to be unwieldy. We had two strategies for making the outcome evaluation plan more manageable. First, we identified two sampling strategies. Some data sources would be collected from all students and graduates, while more intensive data collection methods would be used with a small subset purposefully recruited for case studies. Second, although we initially developed a broad outcome evaluation plan, the detailed instrument development and data collection processes were separated into two phases. The first phase focused on gathering data from the larger sample during their enrollment in the program. In phase one, data sources being collected for course requirements were reviewed. Gaps were identified, new instruments


212

were developed to fill those gaps, and a schedule for data collection was developed.

Data sources. Program faculty recommended that the evaluation use as many existing sources as possible and avoid putting undue burden on faculty or participants. We aligned evidence to specific evaluation purposes. We made critical decisions about what to use, what not to use, and what might be usable if the format was modified. As illustrated in Figure 2, we looked for potential areas of overlap between existing course assessments, data already collected for accreditation purposes, and data sources that would answer our evaluation questions. Using the program theory, we conceptualized leadership outcomes in several ways:

• Changes in both formal and informal leadership positions and roles.

• Changes in self-described leadership characteristics aligned to state and program standards.

• Changes in specific leadership actions.

• Changes in the reciprocal relationship between leaders and their environments.

Based on the program theory, some changes were anticipated during the program, while others were expected to occur after students completed the program. Instruments were identified, adapted, or designed to meet each of these definitions. Figure 3 summarizes the instruments and timeline for both phases of outcome data collection.


213

Po

int

in p

rog

ram

(o

r y

ears

po

st p

rog

ram

)

Yea

rs P

ost

10

X

X

Sel

f

CS S

CS S

CS S

Note

. S

had

ed c

ells

rep

rese

nt

phas

e tw

o o

f ev

aluat

ion

(b

egin

nin

g s

pri

ng 2

011

). C

SS

= C

ase

Stu

dy

Sam

ple

. a In

clud

es C

SS

.

Fig

ure

3.

Ou

tco

me

Ev

alu

atio

n D

ata

So

urc

es a

nd

Tim

elin

e

5

X

X

Sel

f

CS

S

CS

S

CS

S

3

X

X

Sel

f

CS

S

CS

S

CS

S

1

X

X

Sel

f

CS

S

CS

S

CS

S

Sem

este

rs I

n

4th

X

X

Sel

f,

Pri

n,

Fac

X

X

X

CS

S

3rd

Sel

f

X

X

2n

d

X

X

1st

X

X

X

CS S

Pre

X

X

Sel

f

X

CS

S

Pu

rpo

se

Des

crip

tio

n o

f cu

rren

t em

plo

ym

ent

and

resp

on

sib

ilit

ies;

bac

kg

roun

d v

aria

ble

s to

in

terp

ret

ou

tco

mes

Lea

der

ship

beh

avio

rs a

lign

ed t

o p

rog

ram

st

and

ard

s

Lea

der

in

flu

ence

s o

n e

nv

iro

nm

ent

En

vir

on

men

t in

flu

ence

s on

lea

der

Lea

der

ship

beh

avio

rs a

lign

ed w

ith

sta

te

lead

ersh

ip s

tand

ard

s

Op

tion

al d

ata

for

tria

ng

ula

tion

and

cas

e st

ud

ies

Op

tion

al d

ata

for

tria

ng

ula

tion

and

cas

e

stu

die

s

Do

cum

ent

stre

ng

ths

and

are

as o

f

gro

wth

, in

clud

ing

ch

arac

teri

stic

s n

ot

cap

ture

d i

n p

rog

ram

or

stat

e st

andar

ds

Det

erm

ine

ho

w p

arti

cip

ants

’ in

fluen

ce

chan

ges

Co

rrob

ora

te q

uan

tita

tiv

e d

ata;

exp

lain

w

hy

cer

tain

dat

a p

atte

rs e

mer

ge;

ob

tain

rich

er e

xp

lan

atio

ns

of

long

-ter

m

pro

gra

m o

utc

om

es

Dat

a S

ou

rce

Dem

og

rap

hic

Su

rvey

Co

mp

reh

ensi

ve

Lea

der

ship

Su

rvey

21

st C

entu

ry S

tand

ard

s

of

Sch

oo

l E

xec

uti

ves

R

ub

rica

En

d-o

f-co

urs

e re

flec

tio

ns

in f

ou

r co

re

cou

rses

Act

ion

Res

earc

h P

roje

ct

Imp

acti

ng

Stu

den

t L

earn

ing

36

0˚

Fee

db

ack

So

cial

Net

wo

rk A

nal

ysi

s

Inte

rvie

ws

of

com

ple

ters

, su

per

vis

ors

,

and

co

llea

gu

es


214

Item construction. Within the first phase of data collection, we developed a demographic questionnaire and a leadership survey. The demographic survey served several purposes, two of which were relevant for the outcome evaluation. First, it included items about current job title and leadership responsibilities outside of what might be reflected in the job title. Second, it incorporated background characteristics (e.g., career goals, reasons for pursuing degree, first generation college student status) that might be used to analyze subgroup differences in outcomes. Because we wanted to measure outcomes of a leadership program, one central question we addressed was how to operationally define leadership. Although a number of published leadership measures exist, such as the School Leadership Preparation and Practice Survey (SLPPS), the NASSP Assessment Center, and VAL-Ed (Orr, Young, & Rorrer, 2010), instruments for our evaluation were locally developed for several reasons. First, most published instruments measure only a limited range of the leadership skills we expect of our graduates (e.g., Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium [ISLLC] standards; Council of Chief State School Officers, 2008) and assume leaders are in specific hierarchical roles (i.e., principalship). In contrast, our program emphasizes the application of ethics and caring to a broad range of leadership practices regardless of position. A secondary concern was the cost of published instruments. We decided to use the two sets of standards that underlie the program’s definition of leadership for reference points in defining leadership characteristics we wished to measure. North Carolina’s 21st Century Standards for School Executives (NCDPI, 2006) consists of seven standards which are typically assessed on a four-point rubric. NCDPI’s standards are aligned to ISLLC standards. To overcome social desirability problems with self-ratings on the existing rubric, we converted the anchors within each domain to checklists and removed information that would cue the reviewer to choose certain response options. We also have a set of program-specific standards that are less defined but that form the basis for many aspects of the program structure and instructional practices. Features of the program theory specific to ethical leadership largely drove items construction. For example, the program emphasizes an action orientation and a student focus. Thus, several items ask respondents to report the frequency and conditions in which they have advocated for students within the past year. The first full draft of the leadership survey incorporates items related to formal leadership roles, specific leadership behaviors, roles played in situations that required leadership, and factors that facilitate or inhibit respondents’ abilities to enact ethical leadership in their schools. Specific items are from a combination of


215

program curricular elements, faculty input on likely response options, and current student feedback, with items designed using principles described by Dillman, Smythe, & Christian, (2008). Analysis methods are planned to investigate the quality of these measures, and revisions may be made depending on the outcomes of those analyses. Samples of the various items are provided in Table 1.

Table 1 Sample Outcome Assessment Items

Type of Outcome Sample Item Formal leadership role

What is your current position (or, your most recent position if you are not currently employed)?

• Classroom teacher

• Assistant principal

• Other school staff (guidance counselor, school psychologist, etc.)

• Central office staff

• NC principal fellow

• Other (describe):

Informal leadership responsibility

Which of the following leadership responsibilities/roles fall within

your current job responsibilities, even if you don’t hold the formal

title? Select all that apply.

• School Improvement Team leader

• Grade level coordinator / Department head

• Teaching team leader

• Student services / student support team leader

• Member of ad-hoc committee (e.g., curriculum or textbook review, policy review)

• PLC group leader

• Other committee leader

• Formal (assigned) mentor

• Informal mentor

• Head athletic coach

• Other (describe):

Self-rated leadership traits – NC standards

Please select from the list below all items that that reflect behaviors

or characteristics the candidate currently possesses.

• Understands the attributes, characteristics, and importance of school vision, mission, and strategic goals; and can apply this understanding to the analysis and critique of existing school plans.

• Develops his/her own vision of the changing world in the 21st century that schools are preparing children to enter.

• Works with others to develop a shared vision and strategic goals for student achievement that reflect high expectations for students and staff.

• Maintains a focus on the vision and strategic goals throughout the school year.

• Designs and implements collaborative processes to collect and analyze data, from the North Carolina Teacher Working Conditions

Survey and other data sources, about the school’s progress for the periodic review and revision of the school’s vision, mission, and


216

strategic goals.

Specific ethical leadership behaviors

In the past 12 months, I enacted ethical leadership in the following

areas:

Response options: Not at all, once in the past year, quarterly, monthly, bi-weekly, weekly, daily

• Advocated for a single student or small group of students

• Advocated for a large group of students

• Advocated for all students school-wide

• Worked with another individual on curricular or pedagogical initiative to improve learning

Change in leader-environment interaction

Sometimes there are things in our work environments that facilitate

our leadership behavior. Other things may be barriers to our

leadership. To what extent do each of the following represent

facilitators or barriers to your leadership actions?

Response scale: -5 (significant barrier) to +5 (significant facilitator)

• Holding a formal position with power

• Being recognized as a leader in the school (regardless of position)

• Having input during decision-making processes

• Working in a school where the culture promotes collaboration and cooperation

• Not having to fear negative consequences for speaking my mind

• Having formal school leaders who are open to change

Implementation. We decided to phase in implementation of the evaluation over a 12-month period due to several factors. First, the pilot group (cohort 1) would finish the program at the end of spring 2010, long before we could develop the entire evaluation system. We wanted to capture completion data from each cohort, but also wanted some basis for preliminary comparison of pre and post program measures sooner than the two years it would take a cohort to begin and end the program. Thus, we started with cross-sectional analyses based on data collected from several cohorts in spring and summer 2010. Longitudinal analysis began with cohort 6, admitted in summer 2010 and projected to graduate in spring 2012.

Recommendations and Conclusions Designing a comprehensive program evaluation system is a complex process that should engage a variety of experts and stakeholders. Steps within the process must include identifying collaborators, determining specific purposes of evaluation, examining existing data sources, determining gaps in evaluation components, developing a plan to phase in a comprehensive system, and constructing valid instruments.


217

Through our experience in designing this system, we offer the following recommendations for others who wish to design evaluations of leadership preparation programs that are tailored to their unique program features:

1. Know the program. Program faculty may have long ago internalized their understanding of how the program operates. Or, maybe the program faculty never had conversations about how they believe the program operates. In either case, the faculty will need to explicate the details of how the program theoretically works, how the curriculum makes that happen, and what the students look like during and after the program.

2. Understand the needs and concerns of the constituents. The program

director and faculty are not the sole consumers of the data from this evaluation system. We made adjustments to the design based on input from within the program. Further refinements may come from feedback offered from outside the institution.

3. Define what you need and want to know. It is easy to jump ahead into

thinking about data sources or what is easy to collect without being careful about establishing purposes. A clear sense of purpose guides the remaining design and analysis steps. It prevents the data sources from mismatching the purposes. It also prevents the misuse of unneeded resources.

4. Give attention to the methodology – down to the details. Recognize that

you do not have to collect “everything” if your evaluation purposes are not that broad. Capitalize on the data sources you already collect. Attend to the balance between quality and feasibility. Identify sources of expertise which can help you develop high-quality methods given your resource constraints.

5. Look before you leap. Pilot your instruments. Roll out the data collection

process in phases. Ask for the perspectives of your current students. Establish systems for managing the recruitment, consent, data collection, and data analysis phases.

The unique collaboration between the co-authors was grounded in a friendship of several years, which made the evaluation design process easier in some ways. There was value in sharing the two perspectives, and we each initially underestimated the contributions of our own expertise. If principal licensure faculty who are in other programs do not have such existing relationships with evaluators, they may wish to look to resources on working with external evaluators (e.g., Kauffman, Guerra, & Platt, 2006). Evaluators have to feel


218

comfortable asking a lot of questions to understand the program and the evaluation needs. Program faculty need to be comfortable understanding why the questions are being asked, answering those questions, and not worry about having limited backgrounds in evaluation. Although the evaluation system described here does provide for evaluation of several levels of outcomes, it stops short of evaluating the link between leader behaviors and K-12 student outcomes. Once phase two of data collection has started, we likely will return to this student outcome question and see how it fits within our evaluation framework. This link has several interim steps and it is challenging to create strong causal links for such tertiary outcomes (Leithwood, Patten, & Jantzi, 2010; Orr, 2009), especially with a relatively small data set and limited resources for tracking graduates after degree completion.


219

References Blackwell, C., Cummins, R., Christine, D., Townsend, C. D., & Cummings, S.

(2007). Assessing perceived student leadership skill development in an academic leadership development program. Journal of Leadership

Education, 6(1), 39-58. Retrieved from http://www.fhsu.edu/jole/issues/archive_index.html

Buskey, F. C. (2010). Turbulence and transformation: One professor's journey

into online learning. In V. Yuzer & G. Kurubaçak (Eds.), Transformative

Learning and Online Education: Aesthetics, Dimensions and Concepts.

Hershey, PA: IGI Global. Buskey, F. C., & Jacobs, J. E. (2009). Catalysts for redesigning principal

preparation: A courageous journey. International Journal of Educational

Leadership Preparation, 4(2). Retrieved from http://ijelp.expressacademic.org

Buskey, F. C., & Topolka-Jorissen, K. (2010). No more silos: A new vision for

principal preparation. Educational Leadership Review, 11(2), 112-122. Council of Chief State School Officers. (2008). Educational leadership policy

standards: ISSLC 2008. Washington, DC: Author. Dillman, D. A., Smythe, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2008). Internet, mail and

mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Duncan, A. (2010, February 19). Preparing the teachers and school leaders of

tomorrow. Remarks at the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Conference, Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/preparing-teachers-and-school-leaders-tomorrow-secretary-arne-duncans-remarks-american

Fry, B., O’Neil, K., & Bottoms, G. (March 2006). Schools can’t wait:

Accelerating the redesign of university principal preparation programs. Atlanta, GA: The Southern Regional Education Board.

Gross, S. J. (2006). (Re-)Constructing a movement for social justice in our

profession. International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning, 10. Retrieved from http://www.ucalgary.ca/iejll/vol10/gross


220

Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating Professional Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (2008). Educational administration: Theory,

research, and practice, (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hurley, J. C. (2009). The six virtues of the educated person: Helping kids to learn,

schools to succeed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education. Kaufman, R., Guerra, I., & Platt, W. A. (2006). Contracting for evaluation

services. In Practical evaluation for educators: Finding what works and

what doesn’t (pp. 253–263). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1998). Evaluating training programs: The four levels (2nd ed.).

San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Knowlton, L. W., & Phillips, C. C. (2009). The logic model guidebook: Better

strategies for great results. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Leithwood, K., Patten, S., & Jantzi, D. (2010). Testing a conception of how

school leadership influences student learning. Educational Administration

Quarterly, 46, 671-706. doi:10.1177/0013161X10377347 North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (2006). North Carolina

standards for school executives. Raleigh, NC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/docs/profdev/guidelines/standards.pdf

Orr, M. T., with Barber, M. E. (2009). Program evaluation in leadership

preparation and related fields. In M. D. Young, G. M. Crow, J. Murphy, & R. T. Ogawa (Eds.), Handbook of research on the education of school

leaders (pp. 457-498). New York: Routledge. Orr, M. T., & Orphanos, S. (2011). How graduate-level preparation influences the

effectiveness of school leaders: A comparison of the outcomes of exemplary and conventional leadership preparation programs for principals. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47, 18-70. doi: 10.1177/0011000010378615


221

Orr, M. T., Young, M. D., & Rorrer, A. K. (2010). Developing evaluation

evidence: A formative and summative evaluation planner for educational

leadership programs. Salt Lake City, UT: The National Center for the Evaluation of Educational Leadership Preparation and Practice. Retrieved from http://edleaderprepucea.squarespace.com/storage/Developing%20Evaluation%20Evidence.pdf

Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization-focused evaluation (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage Publications. Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic

approach (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Schneier, C. E., Beatty, R. W., & Russell, C. J. (1994). The training and

development sourcebook (2nd ed.). Amherst, MA: Human Resource Development Press.

Smith, D. N., & Roebuck, D. B. (2010). Interviews: Linking theory to practice.

Journal of Leadership Education, 9(2), 135-143. Retrieved from http://www.fhsu.edu/jole/issues/archive_index.html

Starratt, R. J. (1991). Building an ethical school: A theory for practice in

educational leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 27, 185-202. doi: 10.1177/0013161X91027002005

Starratt, R. J. (2004). Ethical leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Walker, W. G. (1993). Theory and practice in educational administration. Journal

of Educational Administration, 3(1), 18-43. Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.


222

A Summer Leadership Development Program for

Chemical Engineering Students

Annie E. Simpson

Coordinator Engineering Leaders of Tomorrow Program

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

[email protected]

Greg J. Evans, Ph.D.

The Engineering Leaders of Tomorrow Program Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering

University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Doug Reeve, Ph.D.

The Engineering Leaders of Tomorrow Program Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering

University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Abstract

The Engineering Leaders of Tomorrow Program (LOT) is a comprehensive curricular, co-curricular, extra-curricular leadership development initiative for engineering students. LOT envisions: “an engineering education that is a life-long foundation for transformational leaders and outstanding citizens.” Academic courses, co-curricular certificate programs, departmental programs, and stand alone workshops emphasize four domains of leadership: Self, Relational, Organizational, and Societal Leadership. This article introduces the 14 week summer leadership initiative for research students in the Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry. Students gather on Friday afternoons from early May to late August to learn and practice leadership. Based on student assessment data, the program is having positive impact.

Introduction

The Engineering Leaders of Tomorrow Program (LOT) was born out of the belief that the full potential of engineering graduates to contribute to society was not being realized and that engineers with significant leadership skills contribute more


223

societal value than those without (Florman, 1996). In the wake of global challenges such as climate change, economic upheaval, energy issues, and food security, engineers will need more than technical skill to generate solutions to contemporary problems; they will need leadership ability (Douglas & Papadopoulos, 2010). The LOT summer program in the Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry is one such opportunity for students to develop their leadership. LOT envisions life-long engineering education that is the foundation for transformational leaders and outstanding citizens.

Overview of the Leaders of Tomorrow Program LOT began in 2002 in the Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry and became Faculty-wide in 2006. The program has expanded rapidly since then. In the 2007-2008 academic year 142 leadership-related events took place with 4064 student attendees. In the 2007-2008 academic year 199 events occurred with 8383 student contacts. In 2009-2010, 255 events took place with 7646 student contacts and in 2010-2011 that number continued to grow to 288 events and 8286 student contacts. Other components of the LOT program include three academic courses focusing on leadership studies, three five-week, co-curricular certificate programs which emphasize self-leadership, team leadership and organizational leadership, Departmental programs, and numerous other leadership-related events and workshops. This article discusses the Summer Leadership Program, a 14-week leadership development series for undergraduate research students in the Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry. An overview of the program philosophy, structure, and pedagogy is provided along with a discussion of the learning outcomes and student feedback.

Program Philosophy

The field of engineering leadership education is growing. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Pennsylvania State University, Tufts University, and other prominent engineering schools in the United States have recognized the need to augment engineering students’ technical skills with opportunities to develop as leaders, innovators, and agents of change (Graham, Crawley, and Mendelsohn, 2009). While more initiatives have begun to support the development of professional skills and intensify team learning (Seat, Parsons, & Poppen, 2001), LOT takes a humanistic approach and aims to foster the development of self-aware, interpersonally skilled, and socially engaged graduates equipped to succeed both as leaders in organizations and in society at large.


224

There are a number of core beliefs that shape LOT curriculum and programming. The first is that leadership can be learned and can be taught. We believe that there are skills and competencies that everyone can develop in the realms of self, team, organizational, and societal leadership. Secondly, LOT is founded on the belief that leadership starts with oneself and that emotional intelligence and self-awareness are essential to effective leadership; it is essential to know one’s strengths and also ones areas for growth (Jackson, 2011). Thirdly, self-reflection is necessary to self-awareness so priority is given to creating opportunities for meaningful, structured reflection. Fourthly, we believe that leadership is a shared responsibility – each person will be called upon to lead, whether by supporting a team to make its best decisions, having the courage to advocate in one’s community, or collaborating with stakeholders to influence public policy. These beliefs among others infuse LOT programming. Teaching leadership to engineers is not without its challenges. Engineering is a highly technical discipline and engineering students have highly demanding schedules. In addition, the processes of the engineering discipline lead to an emphasis on task-completion over the quality of relationships. As Thomas (2010) states in his discussion of teaching leadership to students at the U.S. Naval Academy, the rigor, demands on time, expectations of detached professionalism, and technical competence produce a perverse effect by making our graduates socially inept (Thomas, 2010). Much of our work aims to provide opportunities for engineers to expand their emotional intelligence and self awareness. However, these objectives need to be achieved in ways that appeal to engineering sensibilities. Engineers like to be taught practical, tangible skills which can be immediately applied. This impacts the way that curriculum is developed and facilitated. Whereas with students studying social work for example, the emphasis or motivation for students may be to develop strong relationships with clients, for a professional faculty such as engineering, high value is placed on career success, management skill and problem solving which may also come at the expense of relationship building.

LOT Summer Program Since 2002 more than 325 students have completed the summer program. Sessions are held on Friday afternoons from May to August. Students who wish to participate and who are working as summer research assistants get approval for release time from their supervisors. Students who attend 80% of the program receive a non-credit, Engineering Leaders of Tomorrow Summer Program Certificate.


225

The program has been heavily influenced by the Social Change Model of Leadership Development (Komives, 2011). Since 2007 it has been divided into three sections: (a) Personal Leadership, which includes topics such as self-awareness, emotional intelligence and personal vision, (b) Team Leadership, which includes group dynamics, facilitation skills and conflict transformation, and (c) Societal Leadership, which emphasizes engineering and public policy, current issues, and active citizenship. Four weeks are dedicated to each of these three overarching competencies. Table 1 presents a sampling of sessions which have been delivered in the last three summers. As well as attending seminars and workshops, students participate in research and design team projects, tour local industry facilities and engage in community

Table 1: Examples of Sessions, Grouped by Program Segment

Personal Development Group Leadership Leadership in Society

Myers-Briggs Typology Leading Transformational Change Emotional Intelligence Who Could You Be in the World? (personal visioning workshop) Ethics and Leadership Navigating Your Career Leading with Integrity: Living Your Values The Secret of Successful Failing A Guide to Structured Reflection

Leadership Styles and Myers-Briggs How to Build a Strong and Successful Team Atmosphere Transforming Conflict: Skills for Resolving Conflict While Strengthening Relationships How to Effectively Facilitate Groups and Meetings Team Tune-Up (team project reflections, focusing on group processes) Debate Practice (topics relating to current issues) Giving Active Feedback

Engineering and Public Policy Ethics and Leadership Debate Practice Habitat for Humanity Build Day of Community Service Networking lunch with Alumni and Final Team Presentations History of Leadership

service activities. The rationale for group projects is to allow students to apply their newly acquired knowledge, self-awareness, and team skills to an engineering problem (Colbeck, Campbell, & Bjorklund, 2000). While completing their project students are encouraged to integrate their developing leadership skills into their team process. Past group projects have included:

• designing a green roof.


226

• designing green chemistry labs.

• designing a compost system for an apartment building.

• developing a website for recruiting future chemical engineering students.

• designing an energy efficient home insulation plan.

• designing a bio-engineering facility harnessing bio-methane.

• organizing student tours.

• designing and facilitating leadership workshops.

In summer 2010 the group projects changed from an engineering design project to a curriculum design project. Students were placed in teams and tasked with designing a 15-minute mini-leadership workshop which they facilitated for a panel of alumni judges and their peers. By learning to design and teach a leadership topic such as conflict resolution, public speaking, or diversity in teams, students have to engage with the material more deeply, and embody their learning as they teach others. By introducing a team project that involves teaching others, organizers are better able to assess the level at which students have internalized their leadership learning.

Program Pedagogy LOT programming emphasizes experiential learning. Staff in the LOT Office design curriculum that engages students in active skill development and intentional reflection activities. Other facilitators of sessions include educators from beyond the Faculty and University who have backgrounds in education and in leadership development. As expressed by Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning theory, learning should not only involve cognition, but also thinking, feeling, perceiving and behaving. Efforts are made to engage students mentally, emotionally and kinesthetically in their learning. For example, at a workshop on facilitation skills students would first be introduced to the topic, discuss the role of a facilitator, and brainstorm some responses to common interpersonal challenges that occur in groups. They may then observe a scenario or engage with a case study. Next, students practice a new skill-set in the context of a simulation or group discussion and are given feedback on their facilitation skills. Finally, they are guided to reflect on their learning and experience as a way of taking their new knowledge into future situations.


227

Another example of program pedagogy is a leadership styles workshop based on the work of Bolton and Grover Bolton (1996). After learning about four styles and identifying their own, students are placed in small teams and given 10 minutes to build a tower which will suspend a raw egg. Their only tools are 10 straws and some masking tape. The emphasis of the activity is not on the final product, but on the process (although students do not know this until their structure is built). A group discussion follows where students are led to reflect on questions such as:

• Was everyone’s voice heard?

• How did decisions get made?

• What did each team member contribute?

Experiential learning asks more from students. This kind of learning might require them to step out of their comfort zone as they practice facilitating a simulated team meeting while being observed by their peers, or receive feedback about the impact of their leadership style. Due to the experiential nature of the program, time is dedicated in the first sessions to support students in developing personal relationships with each other. Group guidelines are established to encourage a supportive and committed atmosphere. Students in the LOT program repeatedly respond well to experiential opportunities. Many of the most favored sessions are the ones which emphasize active learning. This kind of learning promotes confidence in leadership practice and a deeper awareness of the challenges and nuances involved in leading. In addition, engaging the same cohort of students in active leadership learning over a 14-week period results in a comfort level, and trust that allows for greater impact than individual workshops.

Student Feedback Assessing learning outcomes has been a consistent feature of the program for the last four summers. Since 2007 a pre-survey has been administered where students are asked to rate their perceived skill level on a scale of one to five, one being very low and five being very high, for a variety of skills that relate to the three major competencies of the program (personal leadership, team leadership, and societal leadership). Survey questions address skills such as interpersonal skills, listening skills, offering feedback, resolving conflict, coaching and developing others, delegating tasks, making ethical decisions and communicating advances in technology to the public. The same survey is then given at the end of the summer to track changes in students’ perceived ability. The expectation is that average


228

values will change, up or down, after students have had opportunities to practice their leadership. There are limits to this kind of indirect assessment as Goertzen (2009) points out in his article, Assessment in Academic based Leadership Education Programs. However, when used in combination with the direct assessment of students final workshop presentations it can be determined that leadership learning is increasing. Results for all cohorts, and for many of the specific competencies measured on the pre- and post- surveys, indicate that there has been a tendency for increase in perceived confidence. All three cohorts were asked the question: “On a scale of one to five how strongly do you value self-awareness in your group interactions?” For all groups there was an increased value. In 2007 the incoming average was 3.3 which rose to 4.3, in 2008 the average rose from 3.9 to 4.3, in 2009 there was an increase from 4.0 to 4.3, and in 2010 responses rose from 3.9 to 4.5. This data, however, was not tested for statistical significance. For other competencies such as listening, resolving conflict, acknowledging the contributions of others in group settings, making ethical decisions, delegating tasks, clearly articulating views, and critical thinking, students were asked to rate their perceived ability before the program and after the program. In almost all cases scores went up. While the data is encouraging and useful, there is still work to be done in refining the assessment strategy. A tension exists between keeping the survey the same to gather consistent data year to year, while balancing the need to change the survey to reflect specific sessions offered each summer. Moving forward, the program assessment strategy is being enhanced to include more qualitative data such as the following testimonials, as well as direct assessment of students’ final workshop presentations.

Student Testimonials

The following testimonials were provided by students who participated in the LOT summer program:

I had never noticed how often people try to solve other peoples' problems

instead of just listening to them. From this workshop I took away the fact

that to actually listen to the person you do not have to listen with your

ears, you also have to listen with your mind. You reserve all judgment and

advice and you let the person speak, while you Listen. As a person whose

passion is relational leadership, this skill really has helped me build my


229

professional and personal relationships, as well as take learning to a new

level.(Saeed Kaddoura, Chemical Engineering Student)

As a result of LOT, I think I’ve learned more about myself as a person.

The experiences within LOT have caused me to reflect on my personal

beliefs and values. I’ve also learned how to work more effectively in teams

and communicate my ideas to others much more clearly and confidently. A

lot of these skills may fall under leadership, but I also think they are just

life stills everyone needs to learn. Technology is an increasingly pervasive

element of our society, yet engineers are by-in-large unrepresented

amongst key decision makers. Leadership education is required to

empower engineers to speak up and contribute to these key decision

making processes. Engineers must seek to develop themselves as leaders

to better understand and influence the effect that the technology they

develop has on society. (Shahed Al-Haque, Engineering Science Student)

After being involved in LOT, I find that I am more self-aware. I know what

my leadership type is and what my tendencies are when working in a

group setting. Becoming involved in this program has shown me that I can

take on many other extracurricular activities and enrich my academic

experience as an undergrad. LOT has given me the opportunity to learn

networking, organizational and event-planning skills that are invaluable

to the skill set that I have as an engineer. (Rosanna Kronfli, Chemical

Engineering Student)

Offering Feedback

Moving forward we seek more ways to offer students meaningful feedback on their personal leadership practice. The Gordon Engineering Leadership program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, among others, have inspired deeper thought into the ways that individual feedback can accelerate student’s growth (Graham, Crawley, & Mendelsohn, 2009). For a co-curricular program such as the LOT summer program where experiential learning and leadership practice are emphasized, there is a need for creative ways to deliver feedback. We are in the process of translating our program philosophy into specific and measurable learning outcomes which will support our growing team to offer personalized feedback to students.

Conclusion The Engineering Leaders of Tomorrow program promotes and facilitates the development of engineering leaders. By incorporating leadership education into


230

engineering curricula and the student experience, graduates will be positioned to contribute more effectively to positive social change and innovation. Special attention is paid to the importance of experiential leadership learning and to the assessment and measurement of student learning outcomes. The summer program in the Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry is one component of the Engineering Leaders of Tomorrow Faculty-wide leadership development initiative. The program offers a cohort of students the chance to come together for 14 weeks to learn and practice their leadership in an informal setting. Participant-completed surveys suggest that the program is producing positive impact on students’ perceived leadership skill. The summer program is one initiative within the Engineering Leaders of Tomorrow program that aims to promote student leadership, enhance student experience, and empower graduating engineers to be effective leaders and change-agents in the world.


231

References Bolton, R., & Grover-Bolton, D. (1996) People styles at work: Making bad

relationships good and good relationships better. Ridge Associates.

Colbeck, C. L., Campbell, S. E., & Bjorklund, S. A. (2000). Grouping in the Dark: What College Students Learn from Group Projects. The Journal of

Higher Education, 7(1), 60-83. Crawley, E., Graham, R., & Mendelsohn, B. (2009). MIT White Paper:

Engineering leadership education: A snapshot review of international

good practice.

Florman, S. (1996). The introspective engineer New York: St. Martin’s Press. Goertzen, B. J. (2009). Assessment in academic based leadership education

programs. Journal of Leadership Education. 8(1), 148-162. Haghighi, K., Smith, K., Karl, A., Olds, B., Fortenbery, N., & Bond, S. (2008).

The time is now: Are we ready for our role? Journal of Engineering Education, 97(2), 119-121.

Jackson, D. (2011). Perception is Reality: Your Strengths Matter. Journal of

Leadership Education, 10(1), 115-122.

Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and

development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Komives, S., Duggan, J., Owen, J., Slack, C., & Wagner, W. (2011) The

Handbook for student leadership development. National Clearinghouse of Leadership Programs (NCLP).

Seat, E., Parsons, J. R., & Poppen, W. (2001) Enabling engineering performance skills: A program to teach communication, leadership, and teamwork. Journal of Engineering Education, 90(1), 7-12.

Thomas, J. (2010). Bet you never heard of this leadership trait. Journal of

Leadership Education. 9(2), 1-4.


232

Author Biographies Annie Simpson is a doctoral student in Curriculum, Teaching and Learning at OISE/University of Toronto. She is also the Coordinator of the Engineering Leaders of Tomorrow Program and the Assistant Director of the Institute for Leadership Education in Engineering (ILead). She has taught in the community college system and has also worked as a counselor, conflict mediator, restorative justice facilitator, and trainer. Greg Evans is a Professor of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry and the Director of the Southern Ontario Centre for Atmospheric Aerosol Research at the University of Toronto. He is co-leader of Engineering Leaders of Tomorrow and the Associate Director of the Institute for Leadership Education in Engineering (ILead). He is a licensed engineer (P. Eng.) and holds a bachelor of science, master of science, and doctorate (Toronto). Doug Reeve is Professor and former Chair (2001-2011) of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry at the University of Toronto. He is co-leader of Engineering Leaders of Tomorrow and the Director of the Institute for Leadership Education in Engineering (ILead). He is a licensed Engineer (P. Eng.), holds a bachelor of science (UBC), a master of science, and doctorate (Toronto).


233

Enhancing Leadership Skills in Volunteers

Landry L. Lockett, Ed.D.

Senior Lecturer Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education, and Communications


College Station, TX 77843-2116 (979) 845-2250

[email protected]

Barry Boyd, Ph.D.

Associate Professor Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education, and Communications


College Station, TX 77843-2116 (979) 845-6296

[email protected]

Abstract This article describes how professionals leading volunteers can purposefully work toward developing the “leadership identity” of individual volunteers. These concepts and the application of them are presented in the context of Cooperative Extension volunteer groups. Specific methods of developing the leadership identity and capacity of individual volunteers and for developing shared leadership within volunteer groups are offered. This article contains many implications and applications for all types of volunteers, including those outside an Extension context.

Introduction Leadership development has been a fundamental objective of Cooperative Extension since its inception. Developing leaders on the local level to lead change and solve local problems is an integral part of Extension’s program development process, and is a unique attribute of Extension. Steady population growth, combined with tightening budgets, underscores the need for Extension volunteers with effective leadership skills to meet the ever increasing demand for quality, relevant educational programming. Leadership competencies in volunteers are


234

essential for volunteer administrators to enjoy a shared ownership and responsibility of Extension volunteer programs with volunteers, and for volunteers to reach their maximum potential. This article focuses on one definition of leadership that is very fitting for Extension work: “Leadership is a relational process of people together attempting to accomplish change or make a difference to benefit the common good” (Komives, Lucas & McMahon, 1998, p. 21). Extension volunteer administrators and Extension volunteers are a team. Leadership is not simply about a position, title, or specific function within a volunteer program. People display leadership when they take action for the common good – internally within the volunteer program, and externally interacting with the public through advocacy or educational programming. Komives et al. (1998) notes that this kind of leadership involves elements of inclusiveness, empowerment, ethics, purposefulness, and process orientation. Extension educators should evaluate how well they are addressing elements and how purposeful they are about developing leadership characteristics in their volunteers. While volunteers will continue to develop leadership skills on their own, purposefully nurturing these skills will increase the rate at which they are developed and thus benefit Extension audiences.

The Importance of Leadership in Extension

Building leadership skills in volunteers, and having volunteers demonstrate leadership ability is a component of all major volunteer administration models (Boyce, 1971; Culp, Deppe, Castillo, & Wells, 1998; Penrod, 1991; Safrit & Schmiesing, 2004). Research studies continue to emphasize the importance of volunteer administrators developing leadership skills in volunteers as an essential component for successful volunteer programs (Boyd, 2004; Lockett & Boleman, 2008; Safrit, Schmiesing, Gliem & Gliem, 2005). Leadership is an important aspect of all Extension volunteer programs. Extension programs are most impactful when Extension professionals and volunteers have a partnership and a balance of program ownership and responsibility (King & Safrit, 1998; Snider, 1985). Snider (1985) notes that there are opportunities for volunteer administrators to give volunteers more program ownership when the agent allows volunteers to perform specifically identified program management tasks. Volunteer administrators that capitalize on skills of veteran volunteers enhance the overall quality of volunteer programs while offering volunteers more ownership in the program and providing options for continued involvement (Van Der Zanden, 2001).


235

Improving Leadership Skills in Volunteers

Extension volunteer programs are likely already improving the leadership skills of volunteers simply by the interactions and functions that naturally take place. By understanding how Extension volunteer administrators can add more purpose to activities that are already taking place, Extension volunteers will be better positioned for intentional leadership development. Komives, Longerbeam, Owen, Mainella, and Osteen (2005) examined the process that people go through to obtain leadership attributes. They labeled the compilation of these skills as the person’s leadership identity. Leadership identity is a person’s leadership capacity or tendency to lead others over time. Komives et al. outlined how leadership identity develops and changes over time, along with how other people influence and form that identity. They noted that there are three primary categories of influence and development which, interacting together, contribute to the development of a person’s leadership identity. These categories include Developing Self, Developmental Influences, and Group Influences. The components of each category are outlined in Table 1 (Komives et al., 2005). Table 1. Factors Contributing to the Development of Leadership Identity

Developing Self Developmental

Influences

Group Influences

Deepening Self-Awareness Adult Influences Engaging in Groups

Building Self-Confidence Peer Influences Learning From Membership Continually

Establishing Interpersonal Efficacy

Meaningful Involvement Changing Perceptions of Groups

Applying New Skills Reflective Learning

Expanding Motivations

Volunteer administrators and Extension volunteer programs can influence individual leadership capacity in volunteers within the context of all three of the categories of Developing Self, Developmental Influences, and Group Influences. Understanding these categories will help volunteer administrators of Extension volunteers focus their efforts for building the leadership identity of those volunteers in both a positive and effective manner. Volunteer administrators can have a direct impact on the Developmental Influences and Group Influences categories; therefore, the primary focus of this manuscript is on these two categories.


236

Developing Self

An individual’s leadership identity develops as a result of personal growth. Komives et al. (2005) listed five properties with dimensions of personal growth, which change throughout the formation of leadership identity. These properties include: deepening self-awareness, building self-confidence, establishing interpersonal efficacy, applying new skills, and expanding motivations. Although self-development occurs internally, all of the factors in the Developmental Influences and Group Influences categories affect each individual’s self-development and formation of a personal leadership identity. Developmental Influences

Komives et al. (2005) noted four essential developmental influences that foster the development of leadership identity. These include adult influences, peer influences, meaningful involvement, and reflective learning. Every Extension volunteer program offers all of these essential developmental influences for group participants. Descriptions of these developmental influences based on the findings of Komives et al. (2005) follow below.

• Adult Influences. Adults play different roles in influencing youth movement through the leadership identity development stages. This primarily takes place within Extension’s 4-H/Youth Development program area. Adults are very important in building confidence and serving as an early building block of support.

• Peer Involvement. The camaraderie and mutual learning that comes from fellowship with like-minded volunteers keeps volunteers engaged in Extension programs over time. Peer involvement from active volunteer members is a great source of aid in learning and orientation of new volunteers.

• Meaningful Involvement. Volunteer experiences often offer hands-on experiential learning opportunities where leadership identities evolve. These experiences enable volunteers to experience diverse peers and program participants, learn about self, and develop new skills. Volunteers develop an understanding that they are part of something bigger than themselves and their individual achievement helps the whole volunteer program.

• Reflective Learning. Structured opportunities for critical reflection can be an important component of people developing their leadership identity.


237

Processing experiences creates deeper learning, promotes self-assessment and volunteer program improvement.

Group Influences

Group involvement, such as volunteering within an Extension program, builds individual leadership competencies. Group influences include engaging in groups, learning from membership connection, and changing perceptions of groups (Komives et al., 2005). Cooperative Extension engages volunteers in group settings through many different volunteer programs. These group settings afford important opportunities for improvement of leadership skills. Descriptions of these group influences based on the findings of Komives et al. follow below.

• Engaging in Groups. Research has shown that group involvement makes a tremendous impact on the development of leadership skills in individuals. A strong relationship exists between a group’s culture and the individual’s view of themselves and how that culture influenced their leadership identity. People naturally seek a sense of belonging in groups, and will find in volunteer programs a sense of place as the program’s mission and core values reflect their own.

• Learning From Membership Continuity. Membership continuity refers to individuals being involved in Extension volunteer programs consistently over time instead of volunteering sporadically or for only one event. Volunteers committed to Extension groups are exposed to multiple learning opportunities that add to their leadership competencies, such as organizational and management skills. Seasoned volunteers become increasingly aware of their responsibility for the development of newer volunteers. They assume responsibility and take on positional leadership and active member roles.

Group interaction influences volunteers’ self-awareness as well as shaping how they view groups and their role with others in groups. Volunteers will come to realize that they must depend on others in the group to accomplish mutual goals. An important concept that is reinforced by working in groups is that working along with others is more productive than working alone. This is a foundational truth that is the basis for all of Extension’s volunteer groups.

• Changing Perceptions of Groups. Being an active participant in volunteer groups tends to change individual perceptions of our groups. Volunteers sometimes begin their involvement viewing the volunteer


238

program as just a collection of friends or like-minded people. As they better understand the purposes of the program, this collection of people begins to be seen and understood as an organization with structure and roles. Eventually, volunteers will see the volunteer program as an entity to develop and that they have a leadership responsibility within that group development.

Implications and Discussion Extension professionals serving as volunteer administrators should strive to develop leadership skills in volunteers by purposefully implementing actions and programs which will influence all three of the primary factors contributing to the development of leadership identity. A discussion of specific steps which could be taken by Extension personnel related to each of these factors follows below. Developing Self Extension professionals can seek to create an environment within volunteer programs that is positive, encouraging, and favorable for volunteer self-development. This can be accomplished by establishing a volunteer program culture that promotes growth and personal capacity expansion by setting an example of thoughtful, positive feedback to volunteer efforts, and sending the clear message to all volunteers that a positive and supportive attitude is expected for fellow volunteers. Extension professionals should seek to provide a framework that allows for mistakes to be made by volunteers, creating learning opportunities without any of those mistakes becoming catastrophic. Developmental Influences

• Adult Influences. Extension professionals can increase a child’s leadership ability by prompting them to serve on a county youth board, task force, committee, or as a teen leader; and then offering them encouragement and guidance in those roles. Verbal and written communication during this time, affirming the child’s leadership aptitude, makes a lasting impression and leads to the acceptance of more leadership responsibility.

• Peer Involvement. Formally establishing mentor programs within adult volunteer groups promotes leadership building with newer volunteers. Observing seasoned volunteers fulfilling their roles, conducting Extension educational programming, and answering questions gives newer volunteers insight and knowledge to draw upon in similar situations. This


239

is an empowering function of the group, and is a catalyst for individual leadership development. As time goes by, mentor relationships transition from new volunteers being followers to new volunteers being collaborators and friends.

• Meaningful Involvement. Involving advisory groups such as Leadership Advisory Boards or Program Area Committees in any aspect of issue identification or the development and delivery of Extension educational programming, exposes volunteers to information and experiences that build on their leadership identity. This is the same result for all volunteers when they are engaged in educational programs and worthwhile projects. The key word here is “meaningful” involvement. It is important that volunteers’ time is not wasted; which makes them feel that they do not matter. When used to their capacity, volunteers benefit personally with added skills and Extension benefits from their perspective, creativity, knowledge, and hard work.

• Reflective Learning. Examples include meaningful conversations, completing a survey, an outcome interpretation piece, or even journaling. Having committee chairs or project leaders complete a summary form that lists items such as: accomplishments, lessons learned, and ideas for future projects, allows volunteer leaders a chance to realize that growth has occurred and valuable insight was gained along the way.

Group Influences

• Engaging in Groups. Group interaction yields many fundamental competencies that are essential for quality leadership such as: relationship building, trust, valuing diversity, conflict resolution, and facilitation skills. Group interaction is not limited to the effect of the entire volunteer program on a volunteer; the same benefits are also derived from subgroups like committees and projects. Serving within the context of a group is often the security and empowerment that many volunteers need in order to be fully engaged and productive, as opposed to timidly feeling like a “lone ranger” afraid of messing up. A group will also act as a type of “checks and balances” for volunteers who’s leadership style is too directive, which is a problem that is not uncommon in Extension volunteer groups. Groups have a way of pulling those volunteers back and supporting them in practicing shared leadership. Therefore, volunteer administrators should make it a priority to determine, at least annually, the projects and/or committees in which every volunteer will serve. Every volunteer should


240

know their role and understand who they will be working with, and for what purpose.

Part of our job as volunteer administrators, as well as one function of the volunteer group as a whole, is to gently remind individual volunteers that they are here to serve the group and Extension’s mission, not stand out as leaders themselves. This helps create a volunteer program culture that is team-oriented, encouraging, accepting, and relaxed.

• Learning From Membership Continuity. One of a volunteer administrator’s key objectives should be creating a volunteer experience that encourages continued volunteering with Extension. Culp et al. (1998) calls this engaging and sustaining volunteers. Volunteer administrators should take the time necessary to familiarize themselves with a volunteer administration model, in an effort to have a functional and effective volunteer program. Strive to maintain a safe place for volunteers to try on roles and practice processes. This will happen when there is continuity in volunteer programs due to organized structure and policies, which promote volunteer retention.

• Changing Perceptions of Groups. Extension volunteer administrators should take an active role in facilitating the positive perception change within volunteers. This will be accomplished through orientation activities, trainings, strategic planning, and advocacy/interpretation events. By gaining an insider’s systems-view of the volunteer program, volunteers are prepared and motivated to serve in advocacy roles for the volunteer program specifically and the Extension agency as a whole.

As with all developmental processes, the individual volunteers in a given program will be at various points developmentally in the process of becoming leaders and finding their leadership identity. This has the potential to cause conflict when there is a lack of understanding and perspective regarding other people’s thoughts and actions. Volunteer administrator’s words and actions will “set the pace” for creating an environment of security, trust, and acceptance.

Summary These concepts and the application of them in Extension volunteer groups offer a purposeful way of developing the leadership capacity and identity of individual volunteers and for developing volunteer groups to be supportive environments for shared leadership. Volunteer administrators cannot make volunteers change;


241

however, an environment can be created in which conditions exist which promote learning, engagement, and trying new things in a supportive climate. These concepts may also prove useful in helping understand why some individuals are frustrated in particular volunteer group experiences. For example, a specific volunteer may have progressed through many stages of developing leadership skills, understands the value of shared leadership, and finds themselves on a project committee where the committee chairperson leads with a very directive, positional leadership style. Being aware of these potential frustrations gives a volunteer administrator a better perspective on the source of some conflicts and how to handle them. This information is helpful for designing educational programs and a volunteer program environment full of learning experiences to foster leadership identity. As the confidence of individual volunteers builds over time, they will take risks and become more involved. They will be empowered to take more active group roles. Leadership development keeps experienced volunteers challenged, interested, and committed to the organization’s future (Connors, 1995). These individuals will benefit personally and professionally from a purposeful effort to enhance their leadership skills, and Extension will benefit from the enhanced performance of these individuals in planning and conducting educational programs.


242

References Boyce, M. V. (1971). A systematic approach to leadership development. Paper

presented at the County and Area 4-H Youth Agents Conference in Pennsylvania and Missouri.

Boyd, B. L. (2004). Extension agents as administrators of volunteers:

Competencies needed for the future. Journal of Extension, [Online], 42(2), Article 2FEA4. Available at http://www.joe.org/joe/2004april/a4.php.

Culp, K., Deppe, C. A., Castillo, J. X., & Wells, B. J. (1998). The GEMS model

of volunteer administration. The Journal of Volunteer Administration,

16(4), 36-41. King, J., & Safrit, R. D. (1998). Extension Agents' Perceptions of Volunteer

Management. Journal of Extension [On-line], 36(3) Article 3FEA2. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1998june/a2.php


college students who want to make a difference. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


(2005). Developing a Leadership Identity: A Grounded Theory. Journal

of College Student Development, 46(6), 593-611. Lockett, L. L., & Boleman, C. T. (2008). Competencies, Benefits and

Limitations for Volunteer Resource Managers Utilizing Volunteers as Middle-managers within a Volunteer Organization. The International

Journal of Volunteer Administration. Volume XXV, Number 2: p. 11-21. Penrod, K. M. (1991). Leadership Involving Volunteers: The L-O-O-P Model.

Journal of Extension [On-line], 29(4) Article 4FEA2. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1991winter/a2.php

Safrit, R. D., & Schmiesing, R. J. (2004). A suggested model for contemporary

volunteer management: Qualitative research bridging the professional literature with best practices. The Journal of Volunteer Administration, 22(4), 34–41.


243

Safrit, R. D., Schmiesing, R. J., Gliem, J. A., & Gliem, R. R. (2005). Competencies for contemporary volunteer administration: An empirical model bridging theory with professional best practice. The Journal of

Volunteer Administration, 23(3), 5–15. Snider, A. (1985). The Dynamic Tension: Professionals and Volunteers, The

balance of sharing leadership. Journal of Extension [On-line], 23(3) Article 3FEA2. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1985fall/sa2.php

Van Der Zanden, A. M. (2001). Ripple Effect Training: Multiplying Extension's

Resources with Veteran Master Gardeners as MG Trainers. Journal of

Extension, [Online], 39(3), Article 3RIB1, Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2001june/rb1.php.


244

Author Biographies Landry L. Lockett is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education, & Communications (ALEC) at Texas A&M University. He earned his doctorate in 2007 through a joint doctoral program offered by Texas A&M University and Texas Tech University. Dr. Lockett joined the ALEC faculty in 2007 as a Texas Extension Specialist in Organizational Development, and became a Senior Lecturer within the ALEC Department in August of 2011. Prior to joining the faculty at Texas A&M, Dr. Lockett served as an Extension Horticulture educator with the Texas Extension Service in Collin County where he developed and conducted educational programs while leading the Collin County Master Gardener volunteers for six years. His research interests include leading volunteers, the power of motivation, and improving teaching effectiveness. Barry L. Boyd is an Associate Professor in the Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education, & Communications (ALEC) at Texas A&M University. He earned his doctorate from Texas A&M in 1991 with an emphasis in leadership education and instructional design and joined the ALEC faculty in 1999. He teaches courses in personal and organizational leadership development, as well as leadership in volunteer programs. Dr. Boyd’s research interests include teaching effectiveness in leadership education, assessment of student learning, and teaching for transformation in the classroom. He is a member of the Association of Leadership Educators, serving as President of the organization in 2008. Prior to joining the faculty at Texas A&M, Dr. Boyd served as an Extension educator with the Texas Cooperative Extension where he developed leadership programs for volunteers and inner-city teens.


245

Using the 5Ps Leadership Analysis to Examine the Battle

of Antietam: An Explanation and Case Study

Bradley Z. Hull, Ph.D.

Associate Professor of Logistics Department of Management, Marketing, and Logistics


[email protected]

Scott J. Allen, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of Management Department of Management, Marketing, and Logistics


[email protected]

Abstract The authors describe an exploratory analytical tool called The 5Ps Leadership

Analysis (Personal Attributes, Position, Purpose, Practices/Processes, and Product) as a heuristic for better understanding the complexities of leadership. Using The 5Ps Leadership Analysis, the authors explore the leadership of General Robert E. Lee of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia and General George B. McClellan of the Union Army of the Potomac—more specifically, the leadership of the two generals on September 17, 1862 during the Battle of Antietam. The paper concludes with suggestions for application in the classroom.

Introduction

This case study examines how two organizations compete and how two leaders can influence change and success given their resources. One organization is small and underfinanced with antiquated equipment. The other is large, well financed, and organized along traditional lines where each part of the organization operates autonomously and is coordinated by top levels of management. This type of confrontation between a small organization and a large competitor occurs often in American business. Two relevant examples might be Dell (in its early days) versus Compaq and Amazon.com (in its early days) versus Barnes and Noble or the now bankrupt Borders. No doubt there is much to gain from an analysis similar to the approach taken in Built to Last (Collins & Porras, 1997) or Good to


246

Great (Collins, 2001). However, a more novel approach may be to examine an extreme example where the competition is not two companies intensely competing for market share, but two armies locked in a life or death struggle. Military history provides examples where this type of competition is direct and a leader’s actions are well documented. For this paper, two armies have been chosen—the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia under General Robert E. Lee and the Union Army of the Potomac under General George B. McClellan as a case study for our analysis. The setting is the American Civil War and the date is September 17, 1862 during the Battle of Antietam. As we approach the 150th (September 17, 2012) anniversary of this crucial event in American history, it is appropriate to reflect on the role leadership played in the battle. By all accounts, the smaller Army of Northern Virginia was out manned, out gunned, and out funded, yet they delivered a draw for the Confederacy. The purpose of this article is two-fold. First, the authors describe an exploratory approach called The 5Ps Leadership Analysis (5PLA) as a heuristic for better understanding the complexities of leadership. A second purpose is to apply the approach to a case study that focuses on the leadership of two legendary generals, Robert E. Lee and George B. McClellan. The authors provide a brief description of the 5Ps model and continue with the case under review—the Battle of Antietam. The paper concludes with suggestions for practice in the classroom.

The 5Ps Leadership Analysis

Dialogue about leadership can be difficult to navigate because participants enter the conversation at different points. As DiPaolo (2009) suggests “Many of our student leaders have been wearing the label of ‘leader’ without any real understanding of what that means” (p. 13). Some describe leadership as position, others examine behaviors, and many describe the personal traits or the results of an individual’s efforts. Development level of the student impacts an individual’s construction of leadership as well (Komives, Longerbeam, Mainella, Osteen, & Owen, 2009). Unfortunately, viewing leadership through a narrow lens may limit an individual’s ability to accurately pinpoint the sources of success or failure. As Kellerman (2004) suggests, rarely does success or failure happen in a vacuum. Variables include the leader, the followers, and the context and each of these variables has several sub-factors as well. In fact, a major challenge to the study and practice of leadership is the many traits, abilities, skills, competencies, processes a leader must possess to be successful. One need not look any further than Bass’ (2008) exhaustive account of the literature. One purpose of the present article is to honor complexity while also placing a container around some of the


247

major factors that lead to effective or ineffective leadership. The ability to discern how to critically examine leadership is important for both scholars and educators alike. When analyzing leadership, and the attributes of effective leaders, we have found it useful to view individuals through the lens of The 5Ps Leadership Analysis.

Burns (1978) suggested that leadership “is one of the most observed and least understood concepts on earth” (p. 2) and by no means does this heuristic provide an all-inclusive list of knowledge, skills, activities, abilities, and traits. However, the 5PLA provides students with a comprehensive tool to gain perspective on leadership through an organized, multi-faceted approach. The 5Ps —Personal Attributes, Position, Purpose, Practices/Processes and Product—can help students more critically examine effective and ineffective leadership and better defend why they came to the conclusion they did.

Personal Attributes are the traits, knowledge, skills, and abilities that leaders embody (Bass, 2008; Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002; McCrae & Costa, 1997; Stodgill, 1948). These traits vary from person to person, and must be capitalized upon and managed depending on the context. Individuals bring natural ability in some areas (e.g., cognitive ability) but this does not mean the individual can influence, inspire, and energize a group of people. Countless combinations of the attributes of the leader (and followers) will be needed for different contexts. Leaders and followers with an intentional awareness of their positive and negative attributes can better manage the personal dimension of leadership.

Position examines how the individual approaches the role of “leader” (Blanchard, Zigarmi, & Nelson, 1993; Gardner, 1990; Goleman, 2004; Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002; Heifetz & Linsky, 2002; McCall, 2010). When others speak about the leader, it is often done so in deference to the role the individual occupies. Most often this person is in a position of authority over others. He or she is the president, executive director, or branch manager. However, if leadership is in fact a process of influence, then the Position need not be a formal one. In other words, each person can step into and out of leadership—often in a moment’s notice. Upon critical examination, a person with a position of authority or leadership could not act as a leader and those without a title (e.g., Gandhi, Mother Theresa) may in fact be exercising leadership. Regardless of how the individual obtained the role, Position is about the style the leader uses to lead others (e.g., Blanchard, Zigarmi, & Nelson, 1993; Goleman, 2004). The leader’s Purpose answers the question, “Leadership for what?” Leaders are clearly aligned around a cause or purpose (Burns, 1978; Bass, 1985; Kouzes & Posner, 2007). At times the Purpose could be deemed as noble and right. At other times, an individual’s Purpose may be unethical and suspect. The Purpose may be


248

set by the board to increase shareholder value or it could be mission driven, such as eradicating cancer. A Purpose may be an individual’s vision, politically motivated or community driven. Regardless, Purpose is essential. Without Purpose, a leader will have a difficult time motivating others to work hard, innovate, and in some cases, place themselves and their families in harm’s way. The Practices/Processes of leadership describe how the leader achieves Purpose; moving the group, organization or community from point A to point B (Heifetz & Linsky, 2002; Northouse, 2010; Yukl, 2010). This movement may include any number of Processes (timing, strategy, initiating structure, goal achievement) or behaviors (Practices) associated with effective leadership (see Bass, 1985; Kouzes & Posner, 2007). At times, the Practices/Processes are simple and straightforward and at other times a complex maze of possibilities (e.g., U.S. debt ceiling crisis in August 2011). Regardless, the Practices/Processes are crucial to the Purpose and may mean the difference between success and failure. For example, the chosen Practices/Processes can energize and engage followers, model desired behaviors, and align resources and people in a common direction. In addition, there are a number of explicit and implicit rules that will foster an environment of creativity and innovation or stability and conservatism. Ultimately, the goal is for leaders to intervene skillfully (Meissen, 2010) and act from a place of intentionality. What is the end Product? Some wonder if the success or failure of the leader can be determined prior to knowing the final results of the Purpose (Ulrich, Zenger, & Smallwood, 1999). In other words, did the individual make a positive contribution that did in fact lead the organization, country or cause to goal attainment? Did they fulfill their Purpose? Or, is the institution worse because of the intervention? In some cases it takes years, maybe decades to know the full effect of an individual’s actions (or inactions) and in the end, some go down in history as great leaders who fulfilled their Purpose and others do not. By using the 5PLA as a lens to evaluate a leader, one can determine why some men and women have achieved great success and others have not. For instance, some individuals are adept at one or two of the 5Ps—a great man or woman may have an incredible purpose or cause for example but fail to implement process to produce results in a way that impacts the masses. Others can produce strong, large-scale results but in a horrifying or unethical manner (e.g., Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin). To apply the tool under discussion to a real case, we look to American history and a conflict between two generals, both West Point graduates who each graduated second in their class. Likewise, both were charismatic in their own right and respected strategists. Their background was somewhat similar, but the results of their leadership differed drastically.


249

A Leadership Case Study: The Battle of Antietam

The Battle of Antietam pitted the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia under General Robert E. Lee against the Union Army of the Potomac under General George B. McClellan. The date was September 17, 1862. The battle under examination (Antietam) became known as the “The Bloodiest Day in American History” due to the massive number of casualties on each side.

Setting the Stage: The Context

In the fall of 1862 the Civil War was nearly two years old and the Confederate States of America (the South) was suffering initial defeats at the hands of the Union (the North). The South had few arms or munitions factories to make weapons, unlike the technologically advanced North. The industrial revolution had made the North wealthy and the almost exclusively agrarian South was virtually bankrupt and lacking the infrastructure to wage war (McPherson, 2002). Upon assuming command of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia, Lee won two initial victories and Southern spirits soared. England and France took interest in an independent South, which would give them access to its cotton crop. If Lee could deliver a significant victory on Northern soil, England and France were prepared to send warships to aid the South, which in the minds of many, would bring the war to a speedy end (McPherson, 2002). Achieving such a victory was a major reason for Lee’s decision to invade the North, but there were others as well (Murfin, 1965). First, 1862 was a midterm election year and there was a growing anti-war sentiment in the North. With another Southern victory, Abraham Lincoln might lose control of Congress (McPherson, 2002). Second, invasion might convince Maryland to secede from the Union since it was a slave owning Northern state with many Southern sympathizers (Gallagher, 1999). Third, Lee knew he could not compete with the extensive resources of the North. With its large population and industrial might, he knew that the North would ultimately overwhelm the South. For the South to win, it needed to do so quickly. Lee’s troops were tired from recent battles, underfed, and had antiquated firearms (Child, 2006). In a September 3, 1862 letter to his immediate superior, Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America, Lee wrote, “And though weaker than our opponents in men and military equipment we must endeavor to harass, if we cannot destroy them” (Thomas, 1995, p. 256). Lee knew he had little alternative to invasion and now was the time to strike—on the heels of his recent victories, when spirits ran high. Thus, his decision to invade with an inferior force


250

was daring, but based on logic (McPherson, 2002). His decision to invade was also supported by Jefferson Davis who supported Lee throughout the War (Gallagher, 1996). Lee took a daring risk and split his troops into five columns: three were dispatched to capture Harper’s Ferry, one to investigate (unfounded) rumors of Northern troop movements, and one marched to Frederick, Maryland where Lee addressed the citizens in an attempt to influence them to join with the South. Dividing forces in enemy territory invited destruction—especially in this case, since Lee had only 38,000 invading against more than 95,000 Union troops (Sears, 1999). In one of the most famous security mishaps in military history, a copy of Lee’s orders supposedly dropped on the ground when Major General D. H. Hill mounted his horse was found by Union soldiers and swiftly turned over to General McClellan. Upon receipt of Lee’s orders, McClellan stated, “This is a paper with which, if I am not able to whip Bobbie Lee, I shall be willing to go home” (Gibbon, 1928, p. 73). Finding the orders known as “Lee’s Lost Orders” should have resulted in the swift destruction of Lee’s dispersed forces, but it did not.

The Personal Attributes of Lee and McClellan

Much has been written about the personal attributes of the two military leaders. History has viewed Robert E. Lee as a tenacious, inspirational, impatient, and achievement oriented leader willing to take calculated risks even under the most challenging circumstances. A graduate of West Point and the son of a military hero in his own right, Lee “scored perfectly in artillery and in infantry and in cavalry. His math scores were superb” (Zwonitzer, 2011, para. 16). Graduating second in his class at West Point, Lee was a scholar who followed rules and was respectful in his interactions (Sanborn, 1966). Douglass Southall Freeman (Freeman, in Gallagher, 1996) perhaps Lee’s best known biographer, described him as follows:

Lee was preeminently a strategist and a strategist because he was a sound military logician. It is well enough to speak of his splendid presence on the field of battle, his poise, his cheer, and his manner with his men, but essentially he was an intellect with a developed aptitude for the difficult synthesis of war. (p. 143)

Lee carefully handpicked leaders to manage his troops, and focused on developing highly creative battlefield strategies. As one humble in spirit, amiable, and respectful of others, Lee developed trusting relations with his boss, Jefferson


251

Davis, and his officers. He was a risk taker who expected the highest performance from his men, taking daring risks that were measured with cold probability based on their chance of success (Freeman, in Gallagher, 1996). George B. McClellan was an organizer and battlefield planner who excelled at whipping troops into shape. Often in conflict with his superiors, some found him arrogant, inflexible, and an individual apt to view himself as an agent of the Lord—one who was called the role versus him seeking it out (Sears, 1999). He had considerable charisma (Child, 2006) and was popular with his troops who affectionately referred to him as “Little Mac.” He cared deeply for his troops and did not want them to die needlessly. This sentiment is perhaps best captured in a quote from his speech given on March 13, 1862, “I am to watch over you as a parent over his children; and you know that your General loves you from the depths of his heart” (Kearns Goodwin, 2005, p. 431). Lee characterized McClellan as an “able but timid commander” (Sears, 1999, p. 273). Historian James M. McPherson takes Lee’s comment further, “The trouble with McClellan was that he was psychologically unable to commit this mechanism that he had created to battle. He was afraid that having created this wonderful machine, if he started it up, he might destroy it” (Gruben, 2001, Part Four, para. 15). In addition, he was slow to move, defensive in battle, and was known to over-plan. It is well documented that Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan had a tenuous relationship and the president once suggested that “McClellan suffered from the ‘slows’ and was ‘good for nothing’ in an offensive campaign” (Sears, 1988, p. 260). How Lee and McClellan Used the Position of Leader

Just as their Personal Attributes differed, so did their approach to leading others. Lee used his position to create an organization which encouraged individual initiative and rewarded operational skills. Lee handpicked battle tested and proven leaders he could trust and who could take initiative on their own. Lee and his generals formed a mutually supportive, high performing team, where each had absolute trust in the others. They easily interchanged duties, troops, and artillery among each other. This team was responsible for survival at Antietam and major Confederate victories both before and after Antietam (Manassas, Chancellorsville, and Fredericksburg). Lee shared and discussed his strategy with his generals. He made the final decisions and granted his generals autonomy in carrying them out (Freeman, in Gallagher, 1996). Lee assumed risks, such as invading with an inferior force, knowing that his generals were capable of carrying out his plans. With extensive information about the enemy’s size and whereabouts, he could accurately assess the risks. Likewise,


252

Lee and his generals Stuart, Jackson, and Longstreet used their role to lead by example. During the Battle of Antietam, Lee and his team of generals were actively engaged in repositioning troops and artillery and encouraging their men. For example, at one critical moment, Longstreet and his field officers patched a Confederate line to keep it from breaking (McPherson, 2002). Although Lee’s organization had few functional barriers, McClellan’s did. His army was composed of six individual corps, each with its own separate command structure, infantry, and artillery. Many of the corps had not worked together before and some had no previous battle experience. Rivalries among the corps commanders made management of his team challenging. To tighten his control of the corps, Mac reassigned his commanders shortly before battle, promoting some and demoting others, which exacerbated their rivalries (Sears, 1999). McClellan further tightened his control by micromanaging by personally laying out explicit battle plans for each corps commander to follow, with little input from most of the commanders themselves (Sears, 1999). In fact, prior to Antietam, McClellan convened no staff meeting to share plans with his generals. During the battle, he personally directed their actions from his headquarters, two and one-half miles from the front lines, visiting the field only once (Sears, 1999). By some accounts, he was asleep when fighting began (Sears, 1999). He issued orders to his generals through couriers and flag signals, but there were no written copies. In addition, he kept apprised of the action by telescope (Sears, 1999) even though parts of the battle were not visible. This distancing potentially clouded his judgment, reducing his ability to achieve success. Along with his “hands off” and “slow” approach on the battlefield, Lincoln had addressed his communication style with his team. Lincoln at one point wrote to McClellan, “I am constantly told that you have no communication or consultation with them [the three corps commanders]; that you consult and communicate with no one but Gen. Fitz-John Porter and perhaps Franklin” (Rosebrock, 2010, Army of the Potomac—George B. McClellan). Porter and Franklin were two of McClellan’s generals during the battle. The Purpose of McClellan and Lee

The explicit Purpose for each general would be to win the battle but it is apparent that other motivations influenced the actions of each man. McClellan’s explicit purpose was to defeat Lee, drive him out of Maryland, and defend Washington (Sears, 1999). However, he seemed to fight the battle so as to avoid defeat (Murfin & Sears, 1995). As noted in the Personal Attributes section, McClellan was extremely cautious in his approach to battle. For instance, he was in possession of Lee’s Lost Orders for more than 18 hours before he acted—critical lost time that allowed Lee to regroup. Lee’s spies in the Union camp almost


253

immediately communicated the mistake to him. Thus, a purpose that drove McClellan was getting it right and ensuring the perfect plan—a difficult task in war. McClellan was noted as saying, “Every poor fellow that is killed or wounded almost haunts me” and “I am tired of the sickening sight of the battlefield with its mangled corpses & poor suffering wounded…Victory has no charms for me when purchased at such cost” (Sears, 1999, p. 196). He clearly valued getting it right—and minimizing casualties—perhaps to his detriment. By some accounts an opponent of slavery and the slave trade (Sanborn, 1966), Lee’s primary allegiance was to his beloved Virginia. From the beginning of his appointment Lee was viewed as a tower of strength (Zwonitzer, 2011). His concern was about the sovereignty of Virginia, its rights as a state and when Virginia seceded so did Robert E. Lee. Along with his devotion to his state and his newfound role, Lee approached battle and the art of war in a different manner than McClellan. Years after Antietam, Lee suggested, “I went into Maryland to give battle…and could I have kept Gen. McClellan in ignorance of my positions and plans…I would have fought and crushed him” (Sears, 1999, p. 273). Expressing a warrior-like attitude, Lee passionately wanted to win on a number of levels.

The Practices/Process of Lee and McClellan

Another difference in the way the two men approached leadership is revealed through their Practices and Processes in getting the work done. Lee excelled at choosing the site for battle and at effectively deploying his troops. Arriving at Antietam first with a small force while his other troops were still dispersed, Lee selected the most advantageous positions. He then defended his superior positions, refusing to relinquish them, and the Union army arrived during the course of the afternoon. In so doing, Lee risked annihilation by early attack. Arriving second, the Union army was unable to survey the field now guarded by Confederate skirmishers. Thus, when the battle began the next morning after the arrival of the rest of Lee’s troops, the Union had imperfect knowledge of the position of the Southern army (Chiles, 1998; Sears, 1999). During battle, Lee arrayed his troops in a semicircular shape, with Lee defending the perimeter and controlling the inside of the semicircle. Figure 1 depicts Lee’s forces defending with Union forces attacking. Lee’s troops and the artillery needed to move only short distances through the interior of the semicircle to be repositioned to other points along the semicircle. In the center, Lee established a supply hub at Sharpsburg, where powder, shot, and spare weapons were stored and deployed (Chiles, 1998).


254

This idea, of course, is the hub and spoke concept used by Federal Express today to provide overnight delivery. Federal Express’s hub is the Memphis, TN airport and it flies virtually all its packages through Memphis. During the Civil War, though, the hub and spoke was a novel concept. It was pioneered and perfected by Lee, and was responsible for much of his punch in battle (Chiles, 1998). During the battle, the North mounted five major assaults and all were blocked. Each time, Lee repositioned enough cannons via these interior routes so that his artillery firepower was superior to that of McClellan’s cannons many of which were used only once and not repositioned at all. During the final assault, Lee’s troops were overwhelmed and retreating and it seemed as if the Southern army was ready to collapse, but the concentrated firepower of 45 repositioned cannons slowed the advancing Union troops until Lee’s reinforcements arrived toward the end of the battle (Chiles, 1988). On the eve of battle Lee was not the only one who was prepared. McClellan had excellent plans as well. His modern, high-tech, long distance cannons would occupy the center of the field where they would rake the Confederate lines from far beyond the range of the antiquated Confederate cannons. Three of his corps would attack Lee’s left, and simultaneously another of his corps would attack Lee’s right. Two of McClellan’s corps, waiting in reserve, would then attack the Confederate center on weakness in the Lee’s left or right (Ballard, 2007). During the battle McClellan fully utilized his technological advantage. His artillery barrage was highly effective at raking the Confederate lines with impunity for most of the day (Chiles, 1998). However, his plan was poorly executed and instead of simultaneous attacks, he inexplicably authorized a series of five sequential attacks, each of which was repulsed. Had any two occurred simultaneously, they would have likely overwhelmed the inferior Confederate force. During the course of the day McClellan lost control of the action. One Union attack occurred spontaneously, without his orders. At the end of the day his two reserve corps (25,000 men) had not fought at all (King, 2001).


255

Figure 1: Lee’s Forces Defending Supply Hub, McClellan’s Forces Attacking

from Three Directions Prior to and throughout the battle McClellan was convinced that a well-armed Confederate Army significantly outnumbered him. The documentary Abraham

and Mary Lincoln: A House Divided suggests, “Union forces twice seemed on the brink of destroying the rebel army. Each time, McClellan refused to order a final assault, persuaded that Lee had reserves hidden somewhere out of sight” (Grubin, 2001, part four, para. 82) Several factors contributed to McClellan’s failure to ensure success. First, he did not share his battle plans with his generals, and made all the decisions remote from the battlefield action. Likewise, rivalries among his generals may have impaired their performance and demoralized the corps. In addition, McClellan was convinced that he was out-numbered by the South (Murfin & Sears, 1995). This was based on his inaccurate information and the disastrous attack early in the day known as the “West Woods Massacre” in which he lost 3000 men in 20 minutes. Finally, organizational boundaries did not permit artillery sharing. For instance, at a critical point during the battle, the middle of the Southern line had broken, and one additional thrust would have ended the battle. The Northern general on the field requested artillery to provide cover for this last and final


256

attack, and was told that no artillery could be spared. However, the North had 350 cannons on the field, many of which were used once and never repositioned.

The End Product for McClellan and Lee

The Battle of Antietam was officially a stalemate between the two opposing armies at great cost to both. Upon examination, it is astonishing that Lee’s army was not over-powered and the Confederacy defeated. Throughout the day the Union raked Confederate lines with impunity because the Confederates had no artillery with comparable range. The Union launched five major assaults, each of which was repelled, and by evening, the Union had gained no ground. During the day, Lee’s line wavered and broke at times but always regrouped. Each time the Union attacked they encountered such ferocious firepower that they were sure they were confronting a superior force. This firepower was generated by Lee’s innovative hub and spoke system (Chiles, 1998). The next day the two armies faced off against each other. The Union anticipated a powerful counterattack. Lee concluded that counterattack was not feasible, so at day’s end he withdrew, ending the battle as a stalemate. McClellan did not pursue Lee. The battle was a tactical stalemate, but a strategic victory for the North. As a result, England and France did not support the South, nor did Maryland secede. Further, the battle provided Abraham Lincoln the opportunity to issue the Emancipation Proclamation which announced the freedom of millions of slaves. Further, Lincoln gained seats in both Houses of Congress. However, the results confirmed Lincoln’s decision to replace McClellan. He was relieved of command a month after the Battle of Antietam. As for Lee, he won two major victories against the North shortly after Antietam (Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville). However, the Civil War dragged on for three more years, when it could have ended on September 17, 1862. Lee eventually lost at the Battle of Gettysburg and surrendered at Appomattox.

Conclusion and Application to Leadership Education In closing, we are left with a few questions: Can a small organization compete successfully with a large well-financed organization many times its size? Can it compete if the large organization also has a significant technological advantage? Does leadership play a crucial role in determining results? Based on the 5PLA, the answer to these questions is a resounding “yes.” Likewise, the analysis


257

provides a description of why Lee’s tired, poorly equipped and provisioned army stalemated the Union army (see Table 1). Table 1. 5 Ps Leadership Analysis of Lee and McClellan

Lee McClellan

Personal Attributes Strong intellect, emphasized

collecting/analyzing data, analytic risk taker,

decisive, humble, trusting

Organized, engaged in conflict with authority

figures, arrogant, slow in decision-making, risk averse, detail oriented

Position Selected generals with specific complementary strengths. Set the overall strategy and trusted his

generals to implement it.

Micromanager who made decisions for his

generals. Inherited his command and

reorganized his generals (de-motivating some).

Purpose To achieve a high profile strategic victory on

enemy soil.

To avoid defeat (Murfin & Sears, 1995).

Practices/Process Innovative use of hub and spoke concept.

Innovative deployment of artillery and use of

limited resources.

Hands-off/Distant. Communicated poorly

and missed several opportunities for victory

given his superior resources.

Product Stalemate; strategic loss for Confederacy.

Stalemate; strategic victory for Union.

In short, Lee had high confidence and expectation for his underfed and outnumbered army and pushed them to the brink. However, McClellan did not aggressively utilize his numerical and technological advantages to soundly defeat the South. This sentiment is perhaps best summed up in the following quotation:

The principle commanders offered a striking contrast in personality and style—Lee pressing his worn army to the edge of ruin in pursuit of beckoning opportunity; McClellan repeatedly shrinking from commitment of his proud host in circumstances favorable beyond the imagining of most generals. (Gallagher, in Perman, 1998, p. 112)


258

As exemplified in the present case, the 5PLA is a useful heuristic for examining leadership. Whether it is a supervisor, the university president, Representative John Boehner, or Steve Jobs, the tool provides students with a method for determining why a leader experienced success or failure. However, we would suggest that leadership is socially constructed and some students and readers may come to a different conclusion than the authors (See Table 1). That is good news because the tool may spark spirited conversation in classrooms, workshops, and retreats. Likewise, the questions posed at the beginning of this section are two of many that may come to mind for both educators and participants alike. We propose that a great benefit of the 5PLA is its flexibility of use. As one reviewer of this article suggested, “the 5PLA should not always be the end product…it should be a springboard for rich discussion and activities/role-play/scenarios which can reinforce learning.” Thus, it is essential that leadership educators are clear about learning objectives so the activity supports and reinforces desired outcomes. Along with the tool’s flexibility, we suggest that the activity and the process of completing the table (see Table 1) provides students with an opportunity to more critically examine the complexities of leadership. Rather than leadership being “one of the most observed and least understood concepts on earth” (Burns, 1978, p. 2), perhaps the goal of any leadership educator should be to make leadership one of the most critically observed and best-understood concepts on earth. The authors believe we can get there.


259

References Ballard, T. (2007). Staff ride guide: Battle of Antietam. Washington DC: Center

for Military History, United States Army. Bass, B. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York:

The Free Press. Bass, B. (2008). The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research and

managerial applications (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press. Blanchard, K. H., Zigarmi, D., & Nelson, R. B. (1993). Situational leadership

after 25 years: A retrospective. The Journal of Leadership Studies, 1(1), 21-36.

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Burns, K. (Director). (1990). The Civil War [DVD]. United States: PBS. Child, R. (Director). (2006). Lincoln and Lee at Antietam: The cost of freedom

[DVD]. United States: Inecom Entertainment Company Chiles, P. (1998). Artillery hell! The guns of Antietam. Blue and Gray Magazine,

XVI, 6-16, 24-25, 41-59. Collins, J. (2001). Good to great: Why some companies make the leap ... and

others don’t. New York: Harper Business. Collins, J., & Porras, J. (1997). Built to last: Successful habits of visionary

companies. New York: Harper Business. DiPaolo, D. G. (2009). When student leaders don’t. Journal of Leadership

Education 7(3), 11-19. Gallagher, G. W. (Ed.) (1996). Lee the soldier. Lincoln, NB: The University of

Nebraska Press. Gallagher, G. W. (Ed.) (1999). The Antietam campaign. Chapel Hill, NC: The

University of North Carolina Press. Gardner, J. (1990). On leadership. New York: The Free Press.


260

Gibbon, J. (1928). Personal recollections of the Civil War. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.

Goleman, D. (2004). What Makes a Leader? Harvard Business Review, 82(1), 82-

91.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the

power of emotional intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Gruben, D. (Director) (2001). Abraham and Mary Lincoln: A House Divided

[DVD]. United States: PBS.

Heifetz, R. A., & Linsky, M. (2002). Leadership on the line. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Review.

Kearns Goodwin, D. (2005). Team of rivals: The political genius of Abraham

Lincoln. New York: Simon & Schuster. Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad Leadership: What it is, how it happens, why it matters.

Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Komives, S. R., Longerbeam, S. D., Mainella, F. C., Osteen, L., Owen, J. E., &


Kouzes J., & Posner, B. (2007). The leadership challenge: How to keep getting

extraordinary things done in organizations (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

McPherson, J. M. (2002). Crossroads of Freedom: Antietam. Oxford: Oxford

University Press. McCall, M. W. (2010). Recasting leadership development. Industrial and

Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3(1), 3-19.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1997) Personality trait structure as a human

universal. American Psychologist, 52, 509-516. Meissen, G. (2010). Leadership lexicon. The Journal of Kansas Civic Leadership

Development, 2(1), 78-81.


261

Murfin, J. V. (1965). The gleam of bayonets: The battle of Antietam and Robert E.

Lee’s Maryland campaign, September1862. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.

Murfin, J. V., & Sears, S. W. (1995). History and Tour Guide of the Antietam

Battlefield. Columbus, OH: Blue and Gray Magazine. Northouse, P. (2010). Leadership: Theory and practice (5th ed.).Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage. Perman, M. (Ed.) (1998). Major problems in the Civil War and reconstruction.

Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Rosebrock, J. (2011). Army of the Potomac: George B. McClellan [Web log

entry]. Retrieved from http://jarosebrock.wordpress.com/union/henry-halleck/george-b-mcclellan-draft/

Sanborn, M. (1966). Robert E. Lee: A portrait. New York: J. B. Lippincott

Company. Sears, S. W. (1999). George B. McClellan: The young Napoleon. New York: Da

Capo Press. Thomas, E. M. (1995). Robert E. Lee: A biography. New York: W. W. Norton &

Company. Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of

the literature. Journal of Psychology, 25, 35-71. Ulrich, D., Zenger, J., & Smallwood, N. (1999). Results-based leadership: How

leaders build the business and improve the bottom line. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in organizations (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NY:

Prentice Hall. Zwonitzer, M. (2011). The American Experience. Robert E. Lee [DVD]. United

States: PBS.


262

Author Biographies Dr. Bradley Hull is an Associate Professor at John Carroll University. Prior to John Carroll, Brad had an extensive career in the oil and chemicals industries with British Petroleum. His research interests are in the areas of purchasing and supply chain management, operations management, transportation management, and enterprise software. He has published articles in the International Journal of

Logistics Management, Journal of Macromarketing, International Journal of

Production Economics, Journal of the Transportation Research Forum, Journal

of Information Systems Education, and Logistics Information Management.

Dr. Scott J. Allen is an assistant professor of management at John Carroll University. Scott is the coauthor of the Little Book of Leadership Development (AMACOM) and Emotionally Intelligent Leadership: A Guide for College

Students (Jossey-Bass). Along with writing and speaking, Scott blogs (www.centerforleaderdevelopment.net), consults, facilitates workshops, and leads retreats across industries.


263

Personal, Professional Coaching: Transforming

Professional Development for Teacher and

Administrative Leaders

Janet Patti, Ed.D. Professor of Administration and Supervision

Department of Curriculum and Teaching Hunter College New York, NY

[email protected]

Allison A. Holzer, M.A.T. Senior Consultant, Training and Coaching

Ruler Group New Haven, CT

[email protected]

Robin Stern, Ph.D. Adjunct Assistant Professor of Education

Teacher’s College New York, NY

[email protected]

Marc A. Brackett, Ph.D. Director, Health, Emotion, and Behavior Laboratory

Yale University New Haven, CT

[email protected]

Abstract This article makes the case for a different approach to the professional development of teachers and school leaders called personal, professional coaching (PPC). Personal, professional coaching is grounded in reflective practices that cultivate self-awareness, emotion management, social awareness, and relationship management. Findings from two case studies support the benefits perceived by teachers and administrative leaders who participated in coaching to enhance their leadership potential and performance. A description of the content and process of coaching is provided.


264

Introduction Amidst many reform strategies in education, few would argue that a key ingredient for improving student achievement is high quality leadership. While leadership skills may come naturally to some, most educators need some form of practice, coaching, or mentoring to become high quality leaders. Yet, professional development opportunities for teachers and administrators who function in a leadership capacity are often too scarce or narrow in focus to cultivate lasting and effective improvement (NSDC 2001). Most school systems regularly provide teacher educators with just two or three days per year of professional development, typically aimed at improving literacy and mathematics scores. For principals mentoring support is often provided during the first year of employment, but most learn their skills through trial and error. Education, the most humanitarian of all professions, falls short in developing its own human capital – its most valuable asset in addressing student achievement (Rotherham, 2008). This article makes the case that effective professional development happens when the adult learner connects personally to the new learning. When educators participate in reflective practices that cultivate self-awareness, emotion management, social awareness, and relationship management, they are in a better position to deliver high quality instruction and leadership. This article addresses findings from teacher and administrative leaders who have participated in coaching to enhance leadership potential and performance.

Coaching in Education and Business

“We cannot teach people anything; we can only help them discover it

within themselves.” Galileo

In a coaching relationship, individuals reflect on their own strengths, challenges, and experiences to develop insights and to experiment with new ideas and behaviors. For decades, coaching has been used in the public and private sectors to develop employees’ skills and performance and to meet organizational goals. In education, coaching has traditionally supported teachers in the acquisition of knowledge, skills and abilities that target student achievement. Many are familiar with one of the earliest, formal uses of coaching that began in the 1980s through the work of Bruce Joyce and Beverly Showers. In their peer-coaching model, teachers observe one another, provide feedback, and engage in collaborative planning for upcoming lessons. This process promotes collaboration and communication among teachers, increasing the likelihood that they will use new instructional practices and curricula (Showers, 1982). Literacy or Mathematics


265

Coaching, widely utilized today, focuses on instructional practices of literacy and math (Toll, 2005). This Instructional Coaching targets the craft of teaching by focusing on knowledge transfer, modeling, skill practice, and feedback (Knight, 2007). Finally, Cognitive Coaching asserts that instructional behavior is a reflection of beliefs; teachers must analyze and change their beliefs in order to change their behaviors. Coaches ask teachers to reflect on their beliefs about the classroom to facilitate making changes or improvements (Costa & Garmaston, 2002). Unlike education coaching, the focus of business and life coaching tends to be on personal growth and performance enhancement through self-awareness, goal setting, and leveraging of strengths. Different styles of business and life coaching, such as Goal-Focused/Solution-Focused, Co-Active and Positive Psychology, emphasize behavioral change that results from personal growth (Biswas-Diener & Dean, 2007; Stober & Grant, 2006; Whitworth, Kimsey-House, & Kimsey-House, 2007). Corporations, non-profits, universities, and individuals enlist coaching to promote professional and personal growth in tandem, in order to yield desired performance results. A handful of empirical studies have begun to show the impact coaching has at the business and personal level, including increases in hope, well-being, self-efficacy, self-esteem, and improved interpersonal relationships (Grant, 2003; Green, Oades, & Grant, 2006; Kohler, McCullough-Crilley, Shearer, & Good, 1997; Ross, 1992; Spence & Grant, 2007). Furthermore, coaching anchored in compassion versus compliance has a greater probability of promoting desired, sustainable change in attitudes and behaviors (Smith, Van Osten, & Boyatzis, 2008). As these examples illuminate, coaching is used in different ways within education, business, and personal growth industries. The coaching approach we have been employing in pre-service and in-service of teacher and administrative leaders draws from the best practices across these myriad industries. We refer to this type of coaching as personal, professional coaching (PPC). Personal, Professional Coaching

PPC is grounded in theories of adult learning, motivation, intentional change, emotional intelligence and self-psychology (Patti, Stern, Martin, & Brackett, 2005). This type of coaching creates a safe place for teacher and administrative leaders to strengthen their leadership skills through self-reflection, collaboration, feedback, and enhanced emotional awareness (Carver & Scheier,1998, Cherniss & Goleman, 1998; Datnow & Castellano, 2001; Grant, 2003; Joyce & Showers, 1982; Spence & Grant, 2007; Slater & Simmons, 2001).


266

The leadership skills that PPC develops, like emotional self-awareness, are holistic and transferrable across various personal and professional domains. It is common knowledge among educators, business leaders, and mental health professionals that the boundary between personal lives and professional roles is permeable. We come to work after leaving the pleasant or the unpleasant morning at home. By the same token, we go home every day filled with a variety of different emotions after a day at school or the office. The development of key skills that permeate personal and professional landscapes leads to lasting changes that promote quality teaching and leadership. PPC has been influenced by recent developments in the fields of social and emotional learning (http://casel.org/) and emotional intelligence (Brackett, Rivers, & Salovey, 2011). In schools dedicated to the teaching of academic, social and emotional skills, it is ever more critical that the modeling of adults mirrors the teaching that children receive. PPC helps educators to work with their own emotions to acquire new skills, receive feedback about their practice, and apply the new learning to their classroom or school. By developing emotion skills, teachers and administrative leaders become more self-aware, self-regulated and socially aware-resulting in a more positive, student-centered learning environment.

Description of the Practice Implementing PPC requires a forward thinking leader with a vision that encourages adults and children to take responsibility for their affective development as well as their cognitive learning. Teacher and administrative leaders participate in at least six one-on-one coaching sessions, one session every two weeks, over a six-month period of time. Coaching sessions are guided by a variety of assessment results, such as the Mayer, Salovey, Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) that measures emotional abilities and the Emotional Competency Inventory, 2.0 (ECI) that measures social and emotional competencies. Each coaching session begins with a reflection to bridge the learning that has occurred since the lesson prior. Each session ends with a reflection and a journaling assignment for homework. A detailed description of the process for the first six coaching sessions is provided in Table 1. Establishing trust is the first step in the coaching process. Once trust is established, the coach helps the leader explore and expand a personal vision as well as a vision for the school or classroom. This visioning work serves as the heart and mind of the motivational process. It provides ownership, directionality and commitment to achieve desired change.


267

Armed with a vision, the leader explores the gaps between behaviors that actually exist and ideal behaviors. The leader then experiments with this new awareness to leverage current skills and reach desired results during daily routines. Where emotional shortcomings present themselves or where recognition of skill deficits exist, coach and leader strategize ways to improve. They begin by taking small steps to meet short-term goals rather than lofty, long-term goals that seem unreachable. The leader brings any obstacles into the coaching sessions where the event or emotional struggle is deconstructed and new goals are established. One six-month series of coaching does not make a seasoned, socially and emotionally intelligent leader. However, the awareness gained from the process becomes part of the leader’s daily tools that can be used to deconstruct similar situations. The emotionally and socially aware leader now becomes more mindful of his behaviors. He continually revisits the vision and fine tunes his skill sets. He accomplishes this by reconvening with his coach or by establishing a reflective process with trusted colleagues. This commitment holds the leader to the integrity of this personal, professional internal work.


268

Table 1 Description of Personal, Professional Coaching Sessions

1 Establish Trust & Encourage Vision

After introductions, a conversation takes place about trust. The client talks about what trusting relationships look like and the coach practices active listening and asks open-ended questions.

The coach introduces the concept of Emotional Intelligence.

The coach and client work together to create a personal vision about where the client sees him or herself in two to three years; the client continues this activity for homework.

2 Expand Vision & Explore Actual and Ideal Self

The coach begins by bridging the learning from the previous session.

Coach and client review, discuss, and expand the client’s vision.

Client writes down characteristics of his/her “actual” versus “ideal” self as a leader. Coach and client discuss gaps between the two.

Coach and client have a conversation about personal values and how they are expressed (or not) in current leadership style and professional life.

For homework, client journals about the gap between “actual” and “ideal” self and how this interacts with his/her vision.

3 Interpret Assessments


Coach interprets MSCEIT and ECI results for the client.

For homework, client reflects on the assessment results and how to manage self-talk in challenged areas.

4 Explore Strengths and Challenges


Coach and client discuss EI and leadership strengths that can be utilized as tools for development; they also identify and embrace challenges that might present obstacles to achieving the vision.

5 Develop a Short-Term Plan


Coach and client discuss and create a short-term plan for the client to develop one EI related skill or competency.

For homework, the client answers a series of reflection questions about strengths, challenges, and values that may impact their success.

6 Develop a Long-Term Sustainable Plan


The client writes a New Story about him/herself that incorporates the values, vision, and “ideal self” discussed throughout the coaching process.

Coach and client discuss and create a long-term plan for the client to achieve his or her vision.

Coach and client take a moment to acknowledge their work together and bring closure to the coaching relationship.

Research Findings We have gathered data on the effects of PPC on teacher leaders, assistant principals, and principals in school. What follows is a summary of our findings


269

from two cases – a large school district in New York City in the United States and a small federation in northern England.

Two Case Studies

Our findings come from two similar yet distinct school systems and samples. In England, at the request of the Chief Executive, we trained 12 internal coaches, teachers and administrators to provide coaching to newly hired teachers in two secondary schools. We studied the impact of this year long development process on the educators as they became coaches and on the educators whom they coached (Patti, J., Stern, R., Brackett, M., Rivers, S., & Holzer, A., 2011). Coaches in training participated in an intensive process in which they received six coaching sessions, attended two week-long trainings, coached two other educators for five sessions and received supervision from a head coach psychoanalyst. We provided coaching to school administrators, school principals and assistant principals in 25 New York City public schools, over four years. The superintendent was committed to developing the emotional literacy skills of her special education students and believed that all adults had to develop and model the same. Each school administrator met individually with a coach over a four to five-month time period. Most of the school leaders also participated in a team coaching process to strengthen their collaboration and communication skills. Together, they created common goals to improve the schools’ climate and students’ academic, social and emotional success. Through facilitated dialogue led by the coach these school leaders talked about behaviors that were inhibiting and enhancing their common vision. Using a series of interviews, we asked participants to reflect on the intrapersonal and interpersonal aspects of their leadership; they shared their goals and process for changing the undesirable behaviors that impeded school progress.

Key Insights

Our findings provide evidence that PPC supports the development of and refocusing on several important teacher and administrative leadership behaviors. Attention to enhancing these skills changes desired behaviors and improves performance. Coaching engages all leaders in a process of self-reflection about their professional roles and practices, leadership strengths and challenges, and emotional and social skill development. With greater self and social awareness they manage conflict better and factor others’ perspectives into their decision-making processes. Self-aware and empathic administrative leaders tend to have better relationships with colleagues. They use more collaborative leadership strategies. As the coaching process develops, the changes demonstrate a shift


270

from the individual leader to the whole organization. Furthermore, their vision for the organization is anchored in a positive school climate and culture. Teacher leaders, who engage in a coaching process, more willingly explore self-behaviors that may challenge the teaching and learning process. They learn about the important role emotions play in the classroom and in the quality of their instruction. Teachers’ relationships with students become more transparent as their newly founded self-awareness increases their empathy and self-management.

Conclusion In this article we posited that personal and professional development must take place in tandem. As the individual learns and experiments with new emotional and social skills, the student demonstrates new behaviors inside and outside the school walls. We discussed how reflecting on one’s purpose and professional vision lays the foundation for the transformational process. We noted that the coaching relationship provides a safe haven for mindful attention to self-change in the areas of self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and relationship management. It is through this individual process that the teacher and administrative leader positively impact the culture and climate of the classroom and school. When schools commit to developing the social and emotional skills of adults and children we see many positive improvements such as increased attendance, decreases in suspensions, better student engagement and increased academic achievement (Weissberg & Durlak, 2005). As one leader participating in PPC said: “As adults and educational leaders, we realize that no person working with children could effect change without a self-realization of who they are. The work we have done this year, especially the team building, helped me to work with staff, whom I thought didn’t have the capacity or ability to rise to the occasion. It goes to show that everyone has the ability and capacity to grow.” Perhaps we should have more faith in the ability of the dedicated professional to willingly become part of the solution of education reform. Such an investment would far outweigh any possible benefits reaped by current top-down and often fear-based models of individual and organizational change.


271

References Biswas-Diener, R., & Dean, B. (2007). Positive psychology coaching: Putting the

science of happiness to work for your clients. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., & Salovey, P. (2011). Emotional intelligence:

Personal, social, educational, and workplace implications. Social and

Personality Psychology Compass, 5, 88-103. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior.

Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press Collaborative for academic, social and emotional learning (2011). Retrieved

from http://www.casel.org. Cherniss, C., & Goleman, D. (1998). Guidelines for best practice. Consortium for

research on emotional intelligence (www.eiconsortium.org). Mayer, J, Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. (2002). The Mayer-Salovey-Caruso

Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT). Costa, A., & Garmston, R. (2002). Cognitive coaching: A foundation for

renaissance schools. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers. Datnow, A., & Castellano, M. E. (2001). Managing and guiding school reform:

Leadership in success for all schools. Educational Administration

Quarterly, 37(2), 219-249. Durkak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger,

K. B. (2005). The impact of enhancing students' social and emotional learning: A meta‐analysis of school‐based universal interventions. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39(3-4), 269-286.

Goleman, D., & Boyatzsis, R. (2005). The Emotional Competency Inventory, 2.0.

Ma. Hay Group. The McClelland Center for Research and Innovation. Grant, A. (2003). Towards a psychology of coaching: The impact of coaching on

metacognition, mental health, and goal attainment. Social Behavior and Personality, 31(3), 253-264.


272

Green, L. S., Oades, L. G., & Grant, A. M. (2006). Cognitive-behavioral, solution-focused life coaching: Enhancing goal striving, well-being, and hope. Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(3), 142-149.

Joyce B., & Showers, B. (1982). The coaching of teaching. Educational

Leadership, 40, 4-10. Kohler, F., McCullough-Crilley, K., Shearer, D. D., & Good, G. (1997). Effects

of peer coaching on teacher and student outcomes. Journal of Educational Research, 90(4), 240-250.

Knight, J. (2007). Instructional coaching: A partnership approach to improving

instruction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. NSDC (2001). Standards for staff development revised. Oxford, OH: NSDC. Patti, J., Stern, R., Martin, C., & Brackett, M. A. (2005). The STAR factor

emotional literacy coaching manual. New York. Star Factor, LLC. Patti, J., Stern, R., Brackett, M., Rivers, S., & Holzer, A. (2011). Developing and

implementing a coaching program for teachers and school leaders in one

English federation: findings and recommendations. (Unpublished manuscript)

Ross, J. A. (1992). Teacher efficacy and the effects of coaching on student

achievement. Canadian Journal of Education, 17(1), 51 – 65. Rotherham, A. (2008). Achieving teacher and principal excellence: A guidebook

for donors. Philanthropy Roundtable. Showers, B. (1982). Transfer of training: The contribution of coaching. Eugene,

OR: Centre for Educational Policy and Management. Slater, C. L., & Simmons, D. L. (2001). The design and implementation of a peer

coaching program. American Secondary Education, 29(3), 67-76. Smith, M. L., Van Osten, E. B., & Boyatzis, R. E. (2008). Coaching for sustained

desired change. Research in Organization Development and Change, 17, 145-174.

Spence, G. B. & Grant, A. M. (2007). Professional and peer life coaching and the

enhancement of goal striving and well-being. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2(3), 185-194.


273

Stober, D. R., & Grant, A. M. (2006). Evidence based coaching handbook:

Putting best practices to work for your clients. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley. Toll, C. A. (2005). The literacy coach’s survival guide: Essential questions and

practical answers. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Whitworth, L., Kimsey-House, K., Kimsey-House, H., & Sandahl, P. (2007). Co-

Active coaching: New skills for coaching people toward success in work

and life. (2nd ed.). Mountain View, CA: Davies-Black Publishing.


274

Author Biographies

Janet Patti is Professor of Administration and Supervision, Department of Curriculum and Teaching, Hunter College, CUNY. In 2004 she co-created and published The Star Factor Coaching Model for leadership development of educators. The model, derived from the work of Dan Goleman and Richard Boyatzis (2001) encourages intentional change and self-directed learning. She is the co-author of Smart School

Leaders: Leading with Emotional Intelligence and Waging Peace in Our Schools. Currently, she is co-authoring a book for Teachers College Press titled, Leadership

for Tomorrow’s Children.

As an educator, coach, and educational consultant, Allison provides trainers, administrators, and teachers professional development support on emotional literacy skills, self-awareness, instructional skills, and leadership development. In her current role as Director of Coaching at RULER Group, she manages a team of trainers and coaches that work with over 60 schools that use a Social and Emotional Learning program called The RULER Approach. Her consulting work includes the development of an online learning platform and a variety of implementation support materials for trainers, administrators, and school-based implementation teams. She is currently co-authoring a book called, Leadership for Tomorrow’s Children with Janet Patti and Robin Stern. Robin Stern is a licensed psychoanalyst, educator, and author, with over 25 years of experience treating individuals, couples, and groups. She has developed and implemented training programs focusing on personal and professional growth, emphasizing the importance of self-awareness, emotional competencies, and ethical leadership. She is on the faculty of Summer Principals Academy at Teachers College, Columbia University, the Training Institute for Mental Health in New York City, and is a senior consultant and lead trainer for the K-12 program The Ruler

Approach developed by Yale University researchers. Marc Brackett is a Research Scientist in the Department of Psychology at Yale University; Deputy Director of Yale’s Health, Emotion, and Behavior Laboratory; and Head of the Emotional Intelligence Unit in the Edward Zigler Center in Child Development and Social Policy. Dr. Brackett is the Founder of Ruler Group, where he works with school systems in the areas of assessment, training, and leadership development. He is the lead developer of The RULER Approach to Social and Emotional Learning, which posits that teaching children and adults the skills associated with Recognizing, Understanding, Labeling, Expressing, and Regulating emotions is the foundation to personal, social, and academic success. Over the last decade Dr. Brackett has delivered keynote addresses to dozens of school districts and organizations, and has trained over 50,000 educators in the United States and abroad on The RULER Approach.


275

JOLE Submission Guidelines

Appropriateness of Topic for JOLE

Articles should relate to both leadership and education, but need not be balanced in their focus and may emphasize either leadership or education. If you are uncertain about the appropriateness of your topic please review previous papers and, if needed, contact the editor. JOLE does not accept submittals published previously or under review by another journal. Submitting an Article to JOLE

Papers are received by email only, sent to: [email protected]. All submittals must be sent as a Word file with a cover memo indicating authors, affiliation, contact, and proposed category. The journal solicits articles in four categories:

• Research Feature • Theoretical Feature • Application Brief • Idea Brief or Commentary

Please focus your article on a specific category and indicate with your cover email. Complete information about the categories is provided at Categories of Articles. Review Process

Upon receipt of your paper the editor will send notice of receipt to the contact author. The editor will review the submittal for suitability for the journal and specific category. If not suitable the editor will provide guidance for the author. If suitable, members of the editorial board, or selected guest referees, will review the submittal. How to Prepare to Write an Article for JOLE

A proven strategy is to review past issues of JOLE and read articles in the same category. As JOLE is a new journal and the number of past issues is developing, authors are encouraged to look at the Journal of Extension www.joe.org which has similar categories. First time authors are encouraged to closely review, even


276

outline, other papers to understand the logic and flow of an acceptable paper in each category. Write for a Professional and Academic Audience

JOLE articles are intended to demonstrate scholarship but are also expected to be readable and useful to a wide audience, including people who speak English as a second language. Hence, they must be written clearly without losing their scholarly value. For more information visit the JOLE website at: http://www.leadershipeducators.org/JOLE


277

"Reading furnishes the mind only with materials of knowledge;

it is thinking makes what we read ours ."

- John Locke

Le Culminant

The Editor wants to remind any interested authors to submit articles to [email protected] as soon as possible for review in the Summer 2012 issue. Note that the style guidelines for JOLE have undergone revision recently. As always…suggestions to the Editor are welcomed and they are often implemented!

Winter 2012, Volume 11, Issue 1 - Association of Leadership

Documents

Transcript of Winter 2012, Volume 11, Issue 1 - Association of Leadership